Coyotes Tempe arena project rejected by public referendum - will remain at Mullett Arena for 2023-24

[MakeCgyGreatAgain]

Bettman has cost the NHL so much with his stubbornness over Arizona. Had they moved this team to a viable city years ago the cap would be over 100M a year by now. Arizona has been a money pit and has held the league back in revenues. They‘ve been the dumping ground for IRetired players. Basically used by other teams as cap relief. How many players traded there only to never play for the team or even another NHL game. Never having the ability to ice a competitive roster. Forever rebuilding and acquiring the cheapest players and having to trade their most expensive players. They have many passionate fans that love the team but unfortunately not enough to support an NHL team. It was a complete embarrassment seeing Mullett arena hosting a professional sports team. I watched games with people who didn’t really know hockey that well, and they asked if this was a minor league game I was watching because of the small arena. That arena was not suitable. Bettman should have been canned a long time ago. How can the owners trust Gary to lead them in the right direction. All those promises he made that just failed. Owners and players alike all lost out on millions in revenue because of Gary’s failed pet project.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

Either way, no sweat off anyone's back. Bye bye

Garbage post.

Bettman should have been canned a long time ago. How can the owners trust Gary to lead them in the right direction.

Wave of expansion in 92-93, when Bettman took over- 50 mil for a team. About 100 mil in 2021 dollars

Seattle paid 650 mil for their expansion in 2021

I think the owners are just fine with Bettman

Had they moved this team to a viable city years ago the cap would be over 100M a year by now.

Why do you think the owners want a higher cap ceiling? No one wants that. The big money owners love the cap, it was the smaller markets that were against it- because the cap tied player pay to hockey related revenue, meaning there would be a floor, meaning the Peter Karmanos' of the world would have to spend more than a fourth of the Red Wings and the Maple Leafs.

 

[StreetHawk]

Garbage post.



Wave of expansion in 92-93, when Bettman took over- 50 mil for a team. About 100 mil in 2021 dollars

Seattle paid 650 mil for their expansion in 2021

I think the owners are just fine with Bettman



Why do you think the owners want a higher cap ceiling? No one wants that. The big money owners love the cap, it was the smaller markets that were against it- because the cap tied player pay to hockey related revenue, meaning there would be a floor, meaning the Peter Karmanos' of the world would have to spend more than a fourth of the Red Wings and the Maple Leafs.

Doesn't matter to the owners what the cap number is so long as it's tied to a % of the HRR. Could be $80 mill or $100 mill.

 

[Turin]

I think that was lined up in advance. I think the NHL is caught off guard by this one.

If they are, they are the dumbest people in the world. Bettman might be annoying but he’s not the dumbest person in the world.

 

[AndreRoy]

Feel bad for Yotes fans but Houston just makes too much sense. Big sports town, strong economically with massive amounts of oil money, a growing population, and a built-in rivalry with Dallas.

Personally though I’d love to see them moved to Orlando. Not because it’s a good sports town (it isn’t) but just to see the look on the hockey establishment’s faces if Florida ended up with a third team.

 

[majormajor]

Issue is rockets owner controls the arena. If someone else owns team could be problem.

I've heard that. Is he known to be hard to work with?

I could be wrong but aren't there other situations in the league like that where the owner of the arena owns the NBA team but not the NHL team? Financially there's still a mutually beneficial arrangement to be had there, so it should be fine as long as the guy isn't a dick.

 

[eojsmada]

If they are, they are the dumbest people in the world. Bettman might be annoying but he’s not the dumbest person in the world.

This. Considering that the NHL is constantly talking with potential ownership groups, has tons of data on tv markets to include those not occupied by current NHL teams, the NHL is already well positioned to make an very informed choice for potential relocation. The only issues are finding suitable owners to buy the team from the current AZ owners. And that can take some time to line up.

 

[MakeCgyGreatAgain]

Wave of expansion in 92-93, when Bettman took over- 50 mil for a team. About 100 mil in 2021 dollars

Seattle paid 650 mil for their expansion in 2021

I think the owners are just fine with Bettman

Just fine is just fine. But if they could be 100 million dollars richer I’m sure that has many upset. Billionaires are always trying to earn more money. They never say oh well I have enough, I think I’ll just be ok with what I have and not try to have more. It’s a competition between the richest people. They all want to be richer. It never stops. They all want to be the top. Bettman has cost the owners more money from the Arizona experiment. Owners were paying them rather than having revenue from them.

Why do you think the owners want a higher cap ceiling? No one wants that. The big money owners love the cap, it was the smaller markets that were against it- because the cap tied player pay to hockey related revenue, meaning there would be a floor, meaning the Peter Karmanos' of the world would have to spend more than a fourth of the Red Wings and the Maple Leafs.



Wave of expansion in 92-93, when Bettman took over- 50 mil for a team. About 100 mil in 2021 dollars

Seattle paid 650 mil for their expansion in 2021

I think the owners are just fine with Bettman



Why do you think the owners want a higher cap ceiling? No one wants that. The big money owners love the cap, it was the smaller markets that were against it- because the cap tied player pay to hockey related revenue, meaning there would be a floor, meaning the Peter Karmanos' of the world would have to spend more than a fourth of the Red Wings and the Maple Leafs.

That’s an absurd comment when the cap number is based on revenues. The higher the cap means the owners are actually making more money. The NFL cap keep rising and other leagues are growing way faster than the NHL. Those high caps mean rich owners.

 

[ACLEVERNAME]

Bettman has cost the NHL so much with his stubbornness over Arizona. Had they moved this team to a viable city years ago the cap would be over 100M a year by now. Arizona has been a money pit and has held the league back in revenues. They‘ve been the dumping ground for IRetired players. Basically used by other teams as cap relief. How many players traded there only to never play for the team or even another NHL game. They have many passionate fans that love the team but unfortunately not enough to support an NHL team. It was a complete embarrassment seeing Mullett arena hosting a professional sports team. That arena was not suitable. Bettman should have been canned a long time ago. How can the owners trust Gary to lead them in the right direction. All those promises he made that just failed. Owners and players alike all lost out on millions in revenue because of Gary’s failed pet projec.

I think you're missing just how important these types of teams are for the league as a whole. You may laugh, you may scoff, you may shake your head - but try and see it in broader terms. A closed cap league is very much an enclosed ecosystem. It's all a cycle. For one to thrive there must be another to waste.

The Arizona Coyotes take on failed contracts from teams like actual coyotes devour road kill from urban areas. Might be gross but it keeps the place clean and allows the environment to prosper as a whole.

If it's not Arizona it's another team, so watch out.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

That’s an absurd comment when the cap number is based on revenues. The higher the cap means the owners are actually making more money.

Higher cap means they're obligated to spend more. This is why the big market clubs were for the cap- so they wouldn't give out big, stupid contracts in an attempt to outbid each other.

The bottom line of the Leafs or Bruins or Rags isn't dictated by the Yotes, beyond revenue sharing- which is fixed anyway.

Just fine is just fine. But if they could be 100 million dollars richer

Bettman has cost the owners 100 million dollars?

Is this each owner, or collectively?

 

[MakeCgyGreatAgain]

I think you're missing just how important these types of teams are for the league as a whole. You may laugh, you may scoff, you may shake your head - but try and see it in broader terms. A closed cap league is very much an enclosed ecosystem. It's all a cycle. For one to thrive there must be another to waste.

The Arizona Coyotes take on failed contracts from teams like actual coyotes devour road kill from urban areas. Might be gross but it keeps the place clean and allows the environment to prosper as a whole.

If it's not Arizona it's another team, so watch out.

Like I’ve said in other posts. When the cap is based on revenues a high cap is a good thing to ownership and players alike. Look at the NFL. All their teams make a lot of money. A failing team does not benefit everyone else. If Arizona was selling out their building every night the cap would be way higher and teams wouldn’t be in cap crunches all the time. Or less likely to anyway. A business model where some teams fail doesn’t benefit more than all the teams being profitable. The cap not going up has caused these trades to dump salary. There’s always foolishnes when it comes to spending. But a team that takes all the bad salaries and not competitive and not making money is not beneficial at all.

 

[MakeCgyGreatAgain]

Higher cap means they're obligated to spend more. This is why the big market clubs were for the cap- so they wouldn't give out big, stupid contracts in an attempt to outbid each other.

The bottom line of the Leafs or Bruins or Rags isn't dictated by the Yotes, beyond revenue sharing- which is fixed anyway.

It doesn’t matter how much the owners pay out in expenses as long as they are bringing in more. Who cares if they have to spend more do to the cap being higher. It is literally meaningless because the cap is based on the revenue split. They don’t get to keep more money if they cap is less. It’s the same percentage split.

Bettman has cost the owners 100 million dollars?

Is this each owner, or collectively?

A profitable team for let’s say 15 years contributing to the growth of the league is easily over 100 million. Arizona was costing the other owners profit because of the revenue sharing. Attendance alone brings in over 100 mill a year on most teams. Having a half full building take half that revenue away. The Coyotes have been struggling for 15-20 years.

 

[ACLEVERNAME]

Like I’ve said in other posts. When the cap is based on revenues a high cap is a good thing to ownership and players alike. Look at the NFL.

I didn't read your other posts. I was replying specifically to your ill-informed (or ignorant) 'money-pit' and 'dumping-ground' takes.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

It doesn’t matter how much the owners pay out in expenses as long as they are bringing in more

So, in a League were revenue sharing is a fixed amount, the Yotes replaced with a team in Narnia that prints money and raises the cap helps the Leafs and Rags bottom line....how?

I'm not saying that the League loves money pits, simply that it's not as simple as you're making it out.

A profitable team for let’s say 15 years contributing to the growth of the league is easily over 100 million.

So 100 mil over 15 years is 6.66 mil a year, divided 30 ways is 222k a year.

That's one vet minimum every three to 4 years!

Assuming 1) that money went directly into the owners pockets and 2) you're not pulling these numbers from your butt

And yet, you're confused why the owners like Bettman when he has caused their franchise values to balloon by hundreds of millions of dollars in his three decade tenure?

But if they could be 100 million dollars richer I’m sure that has many upset. Billionaires are always trying to earn more money.

So the owners, as far as we know, like Bettman- but he has also cost them 100 MILLION DOLLARS.

I mean, one of these is obviously wrong..

 

[Rich Nixon]

It doesn’t matter how much the owners pay out in expenses as long as they are bringing in more. Who cares if they have to spend more do to the cap being higher. It is literally meaningless because the cap is based on the revenue split. They don’t get to keep more money if they cap is less. It’s the same percentage split.

A profitable team for let’s say 15 years contributing to the growth of the league is easily over 100 million. Arizona was costing the other owners profit because of the revenue sharing. Attendance alone brings in over 100 mill a year on most teams. Having a half full building take half that revenue away. The Coyotes have been struggling for 15-20 years.

Even speaking revenue, not profit, the bolded seems highly untrue.

 

[Pengu]

Now CAN THE NHL STOP BEATING THE DEAD HORSE??

 

[MakeCgyGreatAgain]

Even speaking revenue, not profit, the bolded seems highly untrue.I

Even speaking revenue, not profit, the bolded seems highly untrue.

So teams in Canada your tickets range from 80-250 dollars a ticket. Full capacity seating 18,000-19000. So just average that’s 2.7-3 mill per game. Times 41 games. Just average it 113,000,000 a year. Without preseason or playoffs or parking , or concessions.

 

[Scouter]

Well the NHL wants to move the Yotes to Houston because it's a big market, however they could be facing the very same issue that they faced in Phoenix because they have a basketball only owner who owns the building just like in Phoenix who might not even let them in or they could be kicked out again at some point, Kansas City does not have this issue, Salt Lake City is also a basketball owner who owns the building, but he also owns a soccer team so looks like he is more friendly to other sports, plus I think the NHL would ideally rather go into buildings made for hockey 1st and not basketball.

 

[MakeCgyGreatAgain]

So, in a League were revenue sharing is a fixed amount, the Yotes replaced with a team in Narnia that prints money and raises the cap helps the Leafs and Rags bottom line....how?

I'm not saying that the League loves money pits, simply that it's not as simple as you're making it out.


So 100 mil over 15 years is 6.66 mil a year, divided 30 ways is 222k a year.

That's one vet minimum every three to 4 years!

Assuming 1) that money went directly into the owners pockets and 2) you're not pulling these numbers from your butt

And yet, you're confused why the owners like Bettman when he has caused their franchise values to balloon by hundreds of millions of dollars in his three decade tenure?



So the owners, as far as we know, like Bettman- but he has also cost them 100 MILLION DOLLARS.

I mean, one of these is obviously wrong..

So of course he’s made the league money. But let’s not kid ourselves. Arizona has held the league back. You can’t deny that. If Arizona was in a Houston or any other city for the past 15-20’years the whole NHL would be in a much better place. The owners would be more profitable. How about we use that term. Because they are making less than they could have with a successful Arizona team.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

The owners would be more profitable. How about we use that term. Because they are making less than they could have with a successful Arizona team.

How?

 

[MakeCgyGreatAgain]

So, in a League were revenue sharing is a fixed amount, the Yotes replaced with a team in Narnia that prints money and raises the cap helps the Leafs and Rags bottom line....how?

I'm not saying that the League loves money pits, simply that it's not as simple as you're making it out.


So 100 mil over 15 years is 6.66 mil a year, divided 30 ways is 222k a year.

That's one vet minimum every three to 4 years!

Assuming 1) that money went directly into the owners pockets and 2) you're not pulling these numbers from your butt

Ok. So basically you suck at finances. If you take the ticket sales alone from the coyotes. Let’s say their tickets are 100 on average. Other teams have higher ticket prices but lets say theirs on average 100 per seat times 18000 they would bring in 1.8 per game if they sell out. Times 41 per season that’s almost 74 mil per year. Half that because they don’t sell out. That’s like 37 mil per season for 15 years that’s 550 mill being on the cheap side. So if you had a team in a hot market that sold their tickets on average of $150 per seat and sold out every game. So say the sell 2775,000 per game. Just 41 games that’s 113 mill a year times 15 years it’s 1.7 Billion in ticket revenue. Not to mention marketing and all the other advertising you could sell for a popular team. We’re taking over a billion very conservatively.

Sorry I’m on mobile so the reply quote didn’t work properly. But you can read my response above.

 

[Scouter]

So the owner of the Rockets wants an NHL team in his building, however no other owner will be allowed to have an NHL team in his building, which means only he can own it, so the only way this can happen is if Meruelo sells to Fertitta (Rockets owner).

 

[Hostile Offer]

If the Yotes do end up relocating, it should be to somewhere in either the central or mountain time zones (Houston? Austin? Kansas City? Milwaukee? OKC? SLC?) in order to maintain the current division alignment.

I doubt that's priority #1. They need someone who has the money, the market and the arena. Divisions can easily be re-aligned if it comes to that.

 

[Scouter]

If the Yotes do end up relocating, it should be to somewhere in either the central or mountain time zones (Houston? Austin? Kansas City? Milwaukee? OKC? SLC?) in order to maintain the current division alignment.

Word is they are moving.

 

[MakeCgyGreatAgain]

How?

Selling more tickets and more advertising usually generates more money.