Hurricanes sale formally closed, Tom Dundon now majority owner

[EQV]

The Chicago Blackhawks averaged less than 15k fans per game in every year but one from 2000 to 2007, bottoming out at just over 12k fans per game in 2006-2007.

The Pittsburgh Penguins averaged 15k or less in 4 of 7 seasons from 1997 to 2004, bottoming out at just under 12k fans per game in 2003-2004.

The Washington Capitals averaged less than 15k fans per game in 4 out of 7 seasons between 1999 and 2007, bottoming out at back-to-back years of less than 14k in 2005-2006 and 2006-2007.

You know what cured their attendance ills? Winning. And you can see this trend throughout not just the NHL but sports in general. People don't want to pay top dollar to watch a team they don't believe can win. Yes, they have a Cup, but the Canes have been a fundamental incompetent mess since... heck, since they were in Hartford. In the 20 seasons they have been in NC, they have made the playoffs 5 times, in 1998, 2000, 2002, 2006, and 2009, and one of those appearances wasn't even in Raleigh. In a league where 53% of the teams make the playoffs, they make it only 25% of the time. In this same time period, they've watched ticket prices essentially triple, parking passes quadruple, and the volume of games on TV increase. If you ask me, its a miracle they still manage to get the fans they do.

But that's the thing. They have a strong core of fans that won't give up on the team even in some dark times. We all know the area will throw its support to the franchise once they start winning (look at the 2002, 2006, and 2009 playoff runs for proof of that), they just need to roll off a few good years in a row where they do make the playoffs, and things will get much better.

This post should be pinned to the top of any thread about relocating a team in a non-traditional market.

There are very few markets immune to sagging attendance due to poor on-ice performance.

I find it very telling that I'm the first person to quote this post pages later.

When you point out attendance woes of teams in traditional markets, you get ignored.

Do it for a non-traditional market team, and the "relocation" crowd comes out more quickly than flies to a pile of dung.

Obviously there are teams that have had financial problems in non-traditional markets before (Atlanta comes to mind, and the 'Canes also posted substantial losses before the '05 CBA), but attendance is only part of the story.

 

[Tom ServoMST3K]

This post should be pinned to the top of any thread about relocating a team in a non-traditional market.

There are very few markets immune to sagging attendance due to poor on-ice performance.

I find it very telling that I'm the first person to quote this post pages later.

When you point out attendance woes of teams in traditional markets, you get ignored.

Do it for a non-traditional market team, and the "relocation" crowd comes out more quickly than flies to a pile of dung.

Obviously there are teams that have had financial problems in non-traditional markets before (Atlanta comes to mind, and the 'Canes also posted substantial losses before the '05 CBA), but attendance is only part of the story.

You'll find very few regulars on the BoH forum who don't know all these facts.

Ownership, and that owners relationship to his Arena matter much more than fanbase.

Nearly every relocation ever has been about that, and not about fans. The relocation talk came from the fact the current owner wanted out, and we haven't heard anything (until know) about an owner with interest at keeping the team in NC at what the NHL has decided is market value for franchises. And while their lease is good, at the end of the day it's still a lease, and not ownership of the building.

 

[Roboturner913]

You'll find very few regulars on the BoH forum who don't know all these facts.

And yet when the vultures come out, it's always with talk of supposed "non-hockey" markets and cherry-picked photos of empty seats, blah blah blah. Let's not talk ourselves into believing there isn't a significant percentage of people on this board looking right down their nose at "non-hockey markets," and let's not pretend that that particular dynamic isn't a huge part of what goes on here.

 

[Gnashville]

This post should be pinned to the top of any thread about relocating a team in a non-traditional market.

There are very few markets immune to sagging attendance due to poor on-ice performance.

I find it very telling that I'm the first person to quote this post pages later.

When you point out attendance woes of teams in traditional markets, you get ignored.

Do it for a non-traditional market team, and the "relocation" crowd comes out more quickly than flies to a pile of dung.

Obviously there are teams that have had financial problems in non-traditional markets before (Atlanta comes to mind, and the 'Canes also posted substantial losses before the '05 CBA), but attendance is only part of the story.

There was a photo of the Blackhawks playing at home in Chicago from 2006 playing my Predators with a reported attendance of 8,888 (you seriously cannot make that number up) there was easily less than 4,000 fans in actual attendance but Nashville was attacked relentlessly for not having "real" fans that year.

I have posted multiple photos and articles from Toronto, Edmonton, Montreal, Ottawa etc showing empty seats. But questioning fan loyalty in those cities is taboo.

Fact is no market is immune from fan empathy, but some refuse to believe it. If I go to a horrible movie, why should I be expected to watch the sequels? I doesn't mean I hate movies, but if you aren't giving your money to the local hockey team then you clearly hate hockey. You have to be served cow dung and proclaim it steak to be a "real" fan to some.

What's wrong with making the team earn your money? Where is the motivation for an owner/GM to improve the team? If I am losing 60 games a year and making millions why spend money and try to win? Why spend the money to improve the fan's experience?

And yet when the vultures come out, it's always with talk of supposed "non-hockey" markets and cherry-picked photos of empty seats, blah blah blah. Let's not talk ourselves into believing there isn't a significant percentage of people on this board looking right down their nose at "non-hockey markets," and let's not pretend that that particular dynamic isn't a huge part of what goes on here.

100% agree

 

[HisIceness]

Come on Gnash, you know they were just speaking with their wallets.

I know 'Dollar' Bill Wirtz ran that team into the ground but that's still insane considering how large Chicagoland is.

 

[Jeffrey93]

The Chicago Blackhawks averaged less than 15k fans per game in every year but one from 2000 to 2007, bottoming out at just over 12k fans per game in 2006-2007.

Are you suggesting that prior to 2000-2007 Chicago was an unproven market? The capability of that market was known. Therefore, when attendance sags you can attribute to something other than disinterest.

The Pittsburgh Penguins averaged 15k or less in 4 of 7 seasons from 1997 to 2004, bottoming out at just under 12k fans per game in 2003-2004.

And they were on the brink of relocation....needed a new rink, nobody really wanted to build them one....hitched it to a Casino vote that failed....luckily a Plan B worked and Crosby showed up. That team was awfully close to loading up the U-Haul trucks.

The Washington Capitals averaged less than 15k fans per game in 4 out of 7 seasons between 1999 and 2007, bottoming out at back-to-back years of less than 14k in 2005-2006 and 2006-2007.

They went from a Cup final into a rebuild. The year prior to the timeframe you mentioned they averaged over 17,000.....in the late 80's they also were averaging over 17,000.
The league and owners knew the market's capability. They averaged 15k (as you pointed out) during a fire sale and rebuild, and now they've been over 18k for a decade.

You know what cured their attendance ills? Winning. And you can see this trend throughout not just the NHL but sports in general. People don't want to pay top dollar to watch a team they don't believe can win. Yes, they have a Cup, but the Canes have been a fundamental incompetent mess since... heck, since they were in Hartford. In the 20 seasons they have been in NC, they have made the playoffs 5 times, in 1998, 2000, 2002, 2006, and 2009, and one of those appearances wasn't even in Raleigh. In a league where 53% of the teams make the playoffs, they make it only 25% of the time. In this same time period, they've watched ticket prices essentially triple, parking passes quadruple, and the volume of games on TV increase. If you ask me, its a miracle they still manage to get the fans they do.

But that's the thing. They have a strong core of fans that won't give up on the team even in some dark times. We all know the area will throw its support to the franchise once they start winning (look at the 2002, 2006, and 2009 playoff runs for proof of that), they just need to roll off a few good years in a row where they do make the playoffs, and things will get much better.

In a new market you have to 'roll off' those years sooner than later.....and when you do...the honeymoon better last for a while, and the ticket prices better be decent. In other words....in the times you're reaping the benefits of a Cup victory....you better be making some serious bank. That proves the market's capability.

Whether Carolina did this or not I don't recall....if memory serves, if they did... it was at the weaker end of the scale. Forbes doesn't think they've turned their success into anything very valuable.

Attendance is an indicator...it tells you to look a bit deeper. Ticket prices would be the next thing to look at. Every city you mentioned.....I'd wager if they charged the same as Carolina for tickets....those numbers...in those years...would be considerably higher.

 

[Navin R Slavin]

We proved this market's viability when we stood on our feet and screamed at the top of our lungs for the entirety of Game 7 of the Stanley Cup finals, skippy.

Now, maybe it's not proven to your particular satisfaction... but that's really your problem, not ours.

The Canes are staying, folks. Deal with it.

 

[Roboturner913]

Whether Carolina did this or not I don't recall

Attendance for the Canes peaked at 17,560/game in 2012-13. This was after three full seasons of not making the playoffs in 9/10, 10/11 and 11/12.

From 06/07 (first year after Cup win) to 13/14 (the year the wheels really fell off the wagon) average attendance was 16,379, or roughly 88% capacity. That's 8 full seasons with one playoff appearance, and people still came.

With a new owner and some offseason buzz, and the team seeming to be on an upward trend, I don't think it'll take too long to get back to that 15-16K range. People have never demanded that they be a great team, but a string of 12th through 14th place finishes is going to kill interest anywhere.

 

[LowSodium]

As a Texas Rangers fan, the man was part of kickstarting the Rangers back to relevancy. Hopefully he can do the same for the Canes, but I wouldn't expect him to stick around for long.

I wouldn't be surprised if he grabs a big name or two to invest with him to generate interest.

 

[Glacial]

Come on Gnash, you know they were just speaking with their wallets.

I know 'Dollar' Bill Wirtz ran that team into the ground but that's still insane considering how large Chicagoland is.

Add in not televising home games for many years and removing the well-liked broadcaster from the few games they do broadcast (road games, Pat Foley). He laid waste to the franchise second only to Jeffrey Loria and the Expos. On local news' sports segments, the Blackhawks were in the 'other results' category alongside the WNBA and MLS. I've read the minor league Chicago Wolves got higher ratings in some years than the Blackhawks did.

Older fans from when games were actually televised and broadcast fully on radio (not omitting the first period) were burned by Dollar Bill and vowed never to return until he died and the team had new ownership, newer fans didn't exist in any sizeable numbers because if one comes up in the '80s, 90s, 00s and a team doesn't have almost all of their games broadcast on tv, how does that team draw fans in the age of television? And consider how popular the Bears were in that time ('80s and the long Ditka good will tail), the Bulls, and the Cubs (mainly the '80s and parts of the 2000s) and White Sox (1983 and some level in the '90s, then 2005). It was a double whammy against the Blackhawks for building a new generation of fans then, most of the damage being self-inflicted. I mean, no televised home games? For about 19,000 seats, they were sacrificing reaching an audience of several million potentially (that pool is where fans come from) and the tv contract revenue.

 

[blood gin]

They will stay in Carolina for now. I don't see anything imminent. But I'm not completely sold on the viability of the franchise there. There are a few other cities, namely Seattle and Quebec City (and perhaps Hamilton enters the fray again) chomping at the bit for an NHL team.

If people think this is the end and somehow the Canes are stable and secure in Carolina, they're dead wrong.

The league really should've never let Karmanos have the Whalers to begin with. He was trumpeted as the guy to save the Whalers in Hartford and he bolted (he also claimed that if the Whalers could not sell 11k season tickets in 96/97 he'd leave town. They did, but he moved them anyway) And where was the tooth and nail decades long fight like we're seeing in Arizona now to prop up that rotting corpse? Where was Bettman to help the Whalers?

 

[Price is Wright]

Good for the Whalers. But it is starting to appear that Quebec City is getting screwed. Between this news and Jeremy Jacobs spearheading opposition to a team in QC, my optimism and hope for a return is waning.

It should because trust me, the NHL owners want nothing to do with Quebec City. They just can't say it publicly.

 

[blood gin]

It should because trust me, the NHL owners want nothing to do with Quebec City. They just can't say it publicly.

There is demand for hockey in Quebec City. That arena would sell out every night. They would make the league $

The owners don't want that?

 

[Price is Wright]

There is demand for hockey in Quebec City. That arena would sell out every night. They would make the league $

The owners don't want that?

Nope.

They want to expand the game. Quebec does nothing good for the American TV contracts. Montreal is playing nice in public but Bell doesn't want Videotron to have an NHL team. And the most influential owner in the league (Jacobs) is against it happening.

All the reasons you named are better reasons for Toronto to get a second team.

 

[blood gin]

Nope.

They want to expand the game. Quebec does nothing good for the American TV contracts. Montreal is playing nice in public but Bell doesn't want Videotron to have an NHL team. And the most influential owner in the league (Jacobs) is against it happening.

All the reasons you named are better reasons for Toronto to get a second team.

Well Jacobs is 77 so hopefully he'll be pushing daisies soon.

I understand the whole expanding the game argument, but with the addition of Vegas (which is no guarantee) we're really at a point now where we are close to, if not completely maxed out. Especially in the American South and Southwest where they were a little too ambitious.

Is it really that big a deal, to flip Arizona for QC? Would losing the AZ market with nobody watching or attending games and gaining Quebec with a full arena and ratings really be so bad? Maybe what you gain in QC financially outweighs what is lost by jettisoning Arizona

 

[Price is Wright]

Well Jacobs is 77 so hopefully he'll be pushing daisies soon.

I understand the whole expanding the game argument, but with the addition of Vegas (which is no guarantee) we're really at a point now where we are close to, if not completely maxed out. Especially in the American South and Southwest where they were a little too ambitious.

Is it really that big a deal, to flip Arizona for QC? Would losing the AZ market with nobody watching or attending games and gaining Quebec with a full arena and ratings really be so bad? Maybe what you gain in QC financially outweighs what is lost by jettisoning Arizona

Losing the TV market in Arizona would be huge. That's why the NHL protects them. If the Coyotes played in New Mexico they wouldn't care where they moved.

The NHL really, really, really didn't want to lose Atlanta but had no choice. Atlanta is a major TV market (10th largest in the country). They might try Atlanta again in 20 years if they find an owner. They swallowed the loss and put a team in Winnipeg. Losing Arizona would be too much. It would guarantee a weaker TV deal than they currently have.

You want to move the Yotes? Find an owner in Houston. Watch the NHL drop Arizona quick.

(and yes NHL owners will take an empty arena in Houston with a better U.S. TV deal than a packed arena in Quebec with a worse U.S. TV deal.)

 

[Roboturner913]

Sigh.

I give up.

I just ****ing give up

 

[Price is Wright]

Sigh.

I give up.

I just ****ing give up

I don't see why.

Canadians will continue to assume all that matters in hockey business is butts in seats. It's why so many went silly about Ottawa in the playoffs with many saying the Sens were making Canada look bad.

Also Quebec City is never getting an NHL team and all that public money spent will be a waste. The NHL is patiently waiting for Seattle for expansion and will prevent any relocation. Honestly if Quebec City wants a team? Buy the Senators.

 

[Melrose Munch]

There is demand for hockey in Quebec City. That arena would sell out every night. They would make the league $

The owners don't want that?

Truth is, they see the smaller Canadian cities as a step backwards. So does the NHLPA.

 

[GuelphStormer]

Losing the TV market in Arizona would be huge. That's why the NHL protects them. If the Coyotes played in New Mexico they wouldn't care where they moved.

The NHL really, really, really didn't want to lose Atlanta but had no choice. Atlanta is a major TV market (10th largest in the country). They might try Atlanta again in 20 years if they find an owner. They swallowed the loss and put a team in Winnipeg. Losing Arizona would be too much. It would guarantee a weaker TV deal than they currently have.

You want to move the Yotes? Find an owner in Houston. Watch the NHL drop Arizona quick.

(and yes NHL owners will take an empty arena in Houston with a better U.S. TV deal than a packed arena in Quebec with a worse U.S. TV deal.)

would it, though? would Ford or Honda really be all that upset about losing all 14,000 of those viewers? Is NBC really willing to pay millions more for a broadcast contract that necessarily must include those 14,000 viewers? i dont think so. i have never thought so.

indeed, your own suggestion that a franchise in houston would assuage any lost interest in phoenix indicates that phoenix just doesnt matter.

 

[Roboturner913]

I don't see why.

Because a consortium headed by Bill Gates, Warren Buffett and Jesus Christ himself could buy the Hurricanes tomorrow and they could win 10 Stanley Cups in a row and certain people will still be convinced of their inevitable demise because it's a "non hockey market."

After nearly 20 years of reading this stuff online I'm just worn out, and I'm at the point where I'm beginning to realize it's literally never going to end, no matter what. I might as well go outside, get down on my hands and knees and yell at the driveway.

 

[GuelphStormer]

Because a consortium headed by Bill Gates, Warren Buffett and Jesus Christ himself could buy the Hurricanes tomorrow and they could win 10 Stanley Cups in a row and certain people will still be convinced of their inevitable demise because it's a "non hockey market."

After nearly 20 years of reading this stuff online I'm just worn out, and I'm at the point where I'm beginning to realize it's literally never going to end, no matter what. I might as well go outside, get down on my hands and knees and yell at the driveway.

pfffft, this is a silly strawman argument and repeating it 1000 times does not make it any more valid. what is valid and undeniable is that this is a franchise that, for all sorts of past and present reasons, has continually rested near the bottom of the league in terms of revenues, viewership and franchise valuation. does that make it a "non hockey market"? no, but it certainly makes it a franchise that remains vulnerable for relocation if the league chooses to relocate.

why else has karmanos himself been so insistent on a sale being local? because its clear that he believes potential buyers over these past few years see greater value in relocating than remaining.

 

[Melrose Munch]

Losing the TV market in Arizona would be huge. That's why the NHL protects them. If the Coyotes played in New Mexico they wouldn't care where they moved.

The NHL really, really, really didn't want to lose Atlanta but had no choice. Atlanta is a major TV market (10th largest in the country). They might try Atlanta again in 20 years if they find an owner. They swallowed the loss and put a team in Winnipeg. Losing Arizona would be too much. It would guarantee a weaker TV deal than they currently have.

You want to move the Yotes? Find an owner in Houston. Watch the NHL drop Arizona quick.

(and yes NHL owners will take an empty arena in Houston with a better U.S. TV deal than a packed arena in Quebec with a worse U.S. TV deal.)

would it, though? would Ford or Honda really be all that upset about losing all 14,000 of those viewers? Is NBC really willing to pay millions more for a broadcast contract that necessarily must include those 14,000 viewers? i dont think so. i have never thought so.

indeed, your own suggestion that a franchise in houston would assuage any lost interest in phoenix indicates that phoenix just doesnt matter.

Phoenix is not that big a TV market. Losing Atlanta hurt much more, and we lost the focus of a lot of corporate money as well.

Getting into, and being successful in Houston would be much more beneficial for hockey.

 

[Melrose Munch]

The Chicago Blackhawks averaged less than 15k fans per game in every year but one from 2000 to 2007, bottoming out at just over 12k fans per game in 2006-2007.

The Pittsburgh Penguins averaged 15k or less in 4 of 7 seasons from 1997 to 2004, bottoming out at just under 12k fans per game in 2003-2004.

The Washington Capitals averaged less than 15k fans per game in 4 out of 7 seasons between 1999 and 2007, bottoming out at back-to-back years of less than 14k in 2005-2006 and 2006-2007.

You know what cured their attendance ills? Winning. And you can see this trend throughout not just the NHL but sports in general. People don't want to pay top dollar to watch a team they don't believe can win. Yes, they have a Cup, but the Canes have been a fundamental incompetent mess since... heck, since they were in Hartford. In the 20 seasons they have been in NC, they have made the playoffs 5 times, in 1998, 2000, 2002, 2006, and 2009, and one of those appearances wasn't even in Raleigh. In a league where 53% of the teams make the playoffs, they make it only 25% of the time. In this same time period, they've watched ticket prices essentially triple, parking passes quadruple, and the volume of games on TV increase. If you ask me, its a miracle they still manage to get the fans they do.

But that's the thing. They have a strong core of fans that won't give up on the team even in some dark times. We all know the area will throw its support to the franchise once they start winning (look at the 2002, 2006, and 2009 playoff runs for proof of that), they just need to roll off a few good years in a row where they do make the playoffs, and things will get much better.

The New York Rangers have sold out through dark days. Los Angeles and Boston have not been that bad either. None are Canadian.

 

[Nordskull]

First

I dont believe at all the 500M figure.

Second

If he buys for 500M This guy is speculating, he is buying to sell in 2 3 4 years and make a easy 100 or 200M profit, most probably to an eastern thirsty market.

Third

If he buys for say 250, 300M, this guy is buying to stay long term.

Fourth

No matter what, I now firmly believe Qc city is out for ever and my wish is now Quebecor to get something else then NHL going in the arena.