KHL Attendance

[loppa*]

Because those are my thoughts about the KHL. The whole league is built top-down. It is completely unnatural and is bound to fail in the long-term, unless things are changed.

I'd love to have a pan-European hockey league and the KHL could be the framework on which it could be based on, but it doesn't look like the KHL management is going in that direction. They're still relying on nationalist sentiment and claiming it is a Russian league meant for the development of Russian hockey, etc. Creating a hockey club in subtropics with no hockey culture just to mimick NHL expansion, a team in Vladivostok, etc.

It's just hard to find anything good to say about the league. They're doing all the wrong things.

You need to look beyond the narrow confines of the destructive "market logic" that seems to guide absolutely everything pretty much in anglo america.

 

[obskyr]

What are ticket prices looking like in the KHL, and how different are they from team to team?

I know that KHL Medvescak tickets cost about $10 on average but I'm wondering if teams with a longer tradition can afford to rack up the prices a bit more.

Petersburg:
- €143 for the crappiest upper bowl seats
- €194 for goal line seats
- €490-613 for good side line seats
- ~ €4-22 for a game ticket
- ~ €9-33 for tickets to games with the top teams and Spartak (it has rivalry appeal)

Yaroslavl:
- €155 for goal line seats
- €333-665 for good side line seats
- ~ €9-14 for a game ticket

Moscow (Dynamo)
- €155 for goal line seats
- €334 for good side line seats
- ~ €2-13 for tickets to games with the teams nobody cares about (4th catagory)
- ~ €4-24 for tickets to games with the best teams and Spartak (1st category)

Ufa:
- €100 for the crappiest upper bowl seats
- €231 for goal line seats
- €528 for good side line seats
- no idea about game tickets, their site is silent on that (#sksyu)

Chelyabisnk:
- €177-266 for goal line seats
- €421-444 for good side line seats
- ~ €4-17 for a game ticket

That's more exensive than the Czech Extraliga, but significantly cheaper than DEL or SHL.

 

[Jonimaus]

- ~ €2-13 for tickets to games with the teams nobody cares about (4th catagory)

Some of these prices are insane (actually all of them are, just some more than others). 2€? That's less than it costs to ride the bus in my town. Even for my 2nd divison (allsvenskan) team you can't find any tickets cheaper than 17€. Even the cheapest beer (overpriced arena beer yeah I know) costs like 8€. Bring those prices over here please.

 

[thevreelander]

Why are you comparing KHL to NHL? Why would they charge the same amount of money in the KHL? Where did you get that conclusion from? KHL is not competing with NHL - the overall popularity of the sport in Europe is lower than in North America, so the ceiling for team budgets and the quality of play is lower as well (IF the league would operate in a healthy free market environment).

And what you're saying about Europe is incorrect. The price is linked to demand, not just to how developed the countries are. Furthermore, Northern Europe, Germany is just as developed as USA/Canada, while Central Europe, Moscow, St. Petersburg aren't exactly third world countries.

The real problem is the fact that Russia is a post-communist country and contrary to Czech Republic, Latvia, etc., they're not used to a market-based approach. They're mimicking a market-based approach, but at the end of the day the KHL is financed almost exclusively by governmental funds. They could run the league without any spectators.

The games are broadcast by governmental/regional TV channels and in Russia they have the absolute monopoly. There's no real competition. Media is state-controlled. A 'TV deal' in Russia is not a real word. There are no TV deals.

It's the same thing with ticket prices. The Russian public expects the tickets to be ridiculously cheap, they don't really consider hockey a product. They feel entitled to watch it and they're not willing to pay. Just like during the Soviet times.

This is slowly changing and the wealthier cities are leading the way, but they're still light years away from reaching an actual market-based approach. And it's not because it wouldn't be possible, it's because the Russians don't like it. They don't want a self-sufficient hockey league, they want a *great* hockey league and they want it now.

They are in the 2nd world.....does anyone even realize what "third world" means anymore?

I'm going a little off topic here but I asked if the KHL would be going from clubs to franchises because then they would operate all as one business, instead of a bunch of small operations under one umbrella. Revenue sharing could be made the teams with less attendance could be helped. Sponsership could be given league wide. Maybe stuff like this could increase attendance since all the smaller teams would have more money and be able to put more talented teams on the ice.

 

[obskyr]

Some of these prices are insane (actually all of them are, just some more than others). 2€? That's less than it costs to ride the bus in my town. Even for my 2nd divison (allsvenskan) team you can't find any tickets cheaper than 17€. Even the cheapest beer (overpriced arena beer yeah I know) costs like 8€. Bring those prices over here please.

Well, the prices in Sweden and Russia will never be even remotely comparable. But 2€ tickets are ridiculous even by the Russian standarts. You'd have to spend around as much just on a subway trip.

 

[Jussi]

You need to look beyond the narrow confines of the destructive "market logic" that seems to guide absolutely everything pretty much in anglo america.

This might come as a big surprise but in the rest of the world, sports teams can't live off of sugar daddies with endless pockets.

 

[VladNYC*]

This might come as a big surprise but in the rest of the world, sports teams can't live off of sugar daddies with endless pockets.

Except the world's top soccer teams....

 

[SoundAndFury]

Except the world's top soccer teams....

Some and not that many of them. Furthermore, it's an investment rather than just money dumping as is the case with many of the KHL clubs.

 

[boris4c]

Not even the football (soccer) clubs will be able to operate like that anymore, not with UEFA's new FFP rules at least.

 

[Namejs]

I think you didnt read my post right at all, and in some cases you said what i said partly (omitting other things) and in others you missed the point compleatly. Im not saying your post is wrong in general or not, but it isnt a reply to my post, and im to lasy and it would take to much time to go over each point.
Ill give you one major point you missed. The question was not how it is now, but WILL it be... we were talking of the future. As well as KHL and NHL are a different brand of the same product so are comparable. And pls stop with the Russia bashing. Or any kind of bashing it really gets tiring from both sides.

There's no reason why things would change. It has a lot to do with politics, so I don't really want to delve into that too much, but you would understand me, if you'd actually research the KHL finances and the political system of Russia. And how/why the KHL was created in the first place.

KHL attendance is tied 3rd/4th in EUROPE. KHL team budgets are 3-4 times larger than in SHL, yet the ticket prices are 3,4 or 5 times SMALLER than in SHL.

 

[Namejs]

You need to look beyond the narrow confines of the destructive "market logic" that seems to guide absolutely everything pretty much in anglo america.

"Destructive market logic" is the reason why NHL has been operating for nearly 100 years straight and will continue to operate as long as people still care about hockey.

The existence of KHL is linked only to the political establishment of the Russian Federation AND the price of oil and natural gas on the global market (also a part of the destructive market logic, btw).

If in one case the market logic is what will secure the continued existence of NHL, in the case of KHL - it will make the league collapse.

 

[Namejs]

They are in the 2nd world.....does anyone even realize what "third world" means anymore?

I'm going a little off topic here but I asked if the KHL would be going from clubs to franchises because then they would operate all as one business, instead of a bunch of small operations under one umbrella. Revenue sharing could be made the teams with less attendance could be helped. Sponsership could be given league wide. Maybe stuff like this could increase attendance since all the smaller teams would have more money and be able to put more talented teams on the ice.

Ahh, so you're just not aware of the current situation.

They already operate as one business, except it's not really a business. Most sponsors (oil, gas, steel companies, financial institutions, etc.) of the individual teams are directly or indirectly owned by the Russian government, while the couple of billionaires (Donbass, Jokerit) have close ties to Putin.

 

[Alessandro Seren Rosso]

Ok so, Russia sucks, KHL sucks, and so on. So why are you wasting your precious time and energy?

 

[Ivan94]

Not even the football (soccer) clubs will be able to operate like that anymore, not with UEFA's new FFP rules at least.

Financial Fairplay is a joke. its allowed to make deficit up to 45.000.000€ a year if you have a privat sponsor who give this money. and the sponsoring-money e.g. jersey-adds doesn´t count into the deficit.
FFP only hurts small clubs from small countries with 1-2M deficit a year, which doesn´t have a rich owner.

 

[obskyr]

KHL attendance is tied 3rd/4th in EUROPE. KHL team budgets are 3-4 times larger than in SHL, yet the ticket prices are 3,4 or 5 times SMALLER than in SHL.

That's far-fetched. KHL is the third league in the world by total attendance (yes, AHL is bigger, simply because they have more games). There are only 9 clubs with attendance below the SHL, 9 more are on pair with Sweden (not counting Göteborg, SHL is 11 clubs with numbers ranging from 5,039 to 6,678 per game) and 10 clubs have much better attendance (Göteborg would fit among them just fine, it's right in between Bratislava and Yaroslavl). SHL season tickets vary from 232 and 336 to 1,032 and 1,346 euro (I remember you like Khabrovsk a lot, their season tickets vary from 222 to 998), while most of the cheapest KHL season tickets are around 100-150 euro and the most expensive ones usually are like 400-500 euro.

 

[SoundAndFury]

That's far-fetched. KHL is the third league in the world by total attendance (yes, AHL is bigger, simply because they have more games). There are only 9 clubs with attendance below the SHL, 9 more are on pair with Sweden (not counting Göteborg, SHL is 11 clubs with numbers ranging from 5,039 to 6,678 per game) and 10 clubs have much better attendance (Göteborg would fit among them just fine, it's right in between Bratislava and Yaroslavl).

Consider the fact that average town the team is based in in the SHL is 10 times smaller than in the KHL.

 

[obskyr]

Consider the fact that average town the team is based in in the SHL is 10 times smaller than in the KHL.

We may also consider the size of the KHL arenas, right? That wasn't the point anyway, we're talking about the pure attendance figures that Sweden simply doesn't have.

 

[loppa*]

This might come as a big surprise but in the rest of the world, sports teams can't live off of sugar daddies with endless pockets.

Much of the rest of the world. The culture of eastern europe was to invest in sport regardless of weather or not the state would lose some money. In fact sport was in general a losing venture. Yet the state continued to invest in it. Different culture man.
Take for example Belarus and their hockey development. Totally a losing money venture, yet dude, they probably had the biggest hockey expansion in the world since 1991. So take your pick, would you prefer to have less hockey via obeying the free market, or would you prefer the state to invest in hockey, to expand hockey, which would be against those paranoid libertarian goals/desires? That's right, lets not be lunatic fundamentalists who want to drive a country to the status of somalia, investments in hockey and other things are of course necessary even if they may not always produce profits.

"Destructive market logic" is the reason why NHL has been operating for nearly 100 years straight and will continue to operate as long as people still care about hockey.

The existence of KHL is linked only to the political establishment of the Russian Federation AND the price of oil and natural gas on the global market (also a part of the destructive market logic, btw).

If in one case the market logic is what will secure the continued existence of NHL, in the case of KHL - it will make the league collapse.

Canada and the US are high income countries, where is so much excess income to be milked from the masses. Hockey is just one such way that the money of the masses gets milked. The goal fist and foremost is entertainment and milking money, rather than sport.

 

[obskyr]

Much of the rest of the world. The culture of eastern europe was to invest in sport regardless of weather or not the state would lose some money. In fact sport was in general a losing venture. Yet the state continued to invest in it. Different culture man.
Take for example Belarus and their hockey development. Totally a losing money venture, yet dude, they probably had the biggest hockey expansion in the world since 1991. So take your pick, would you prefer to have less hockey via obeying the free market, or would you prefer the state to invest in hockey, to expand hockey, which would be against those paranoid libertarian goals/desires?

I'd pick the market approach being taken as a virtue (and that's what most of the KHL owners at least are talking about) any day. I find the ways that some of the clubs disregard their fans to be atrocious, I think that selling game tickets for the prices several times lower than movie ticket prices is disrespectful to the game I love, I also think that the clubs that don't see agressive marketing of their brands and the league they are part of as one of the points of their existence do not really help the game to grow and develop.

I find it absurd that Spartak Moscow, a club left without money, doesn't even bother with applying extreme financial measures to their team and continues to keep its overpaid star players, writing letters to influential people and waiting for big money to flow in, just because they feel like they're somehow valuable to Russian hockey. I honestly wish that club to die and I wish its management to lose their jobs and stay away from sports for the rest of their lives.

 

[Alessandro Seren Rosso]

I find it absurd that Spartak Moscow, a club left without money, doesn't even bother with applying extreme financial measures to their team and continues to keep its overpaid star players, writing letters to influential people and waiting for big money to flow in, just because they feel like they're somehow valuable to Russian hockey. I honestly wish that club to die and I wish its management to lose their jobs and stay away from sports for the rest of their lives.

I kind of agree, but it's not that simple. They should simply sell all their "stars", pay salaries, end the season with honor and quietly get back to the VHL. This way they wouldn't die. But I fear that they'll end up like Krylya Sovetov

 

[Jussi]

Ok so, Russia sucks, KHL sucks, and so on. So why are you wasting your precious time and energy?

Noting the issues/problems doesn't mean they suck period.

Financial Fairplay is a joke. its allowed to make deficit up to 45.000.000€ a year if you have a privat sponsor who give this money. and the sponsoring-money e.g. jersey-adds doesn´t count into the deficit.
FFP only hurts small clubs from small countries with 1-2M deficit a year, which doesn´t have a rich owner.

Might want to check out what Chelsea are forced to do over the next two years...

Much of the rest of the world. The culture of eastern europe was to invest in sport regardless of weather or not the state would lose some money. In fact sport was in general a losing venture. Yet the state continued to invest in it. Different culture man.

That culture being political. Sports was used as a political tool during the Cold War era. It's the same with Belarus, though in a slightly different sense (dictator/president being a big hockey fan).

 

[Acallabeth]

Tickets for Metallurg Nk games are like $8 for relatively good seats. That's why the worst and poorest team in the league always has 5x Spartak or CSKA attendance.

 

[bobbeaver]

Some and not that many of them. Furthermore, it's an investment rather than just money dumping as is the case with many of the KHL clubs.

Its the same investment as in SKA or Medvescak or Slovan as are most clubs sponsors are there to show their presence infront of big crowds and TV audience, for either domestic (origine of the club) push or push into Russia. Some are there because of politics directive but not all. In some cases i dont see the difference really, Spanish league lives of of a national tit. And i dont mean sponsors but most money they get are from paying almost no taxes, basically have benefits like a charity. English football, while they have sponsors, are largely owned by single parent company or a ritch sugar daddy. You cant really generalize.

 

[bobbeaver]

There's no reason why things would change. It has a lot to do with politics, so I don't really want to delve into that too much, but you would understand me, if you'd actually research the KHL finances and the political system of Russia. And how/why the KHL was created in the first place.

KHL attendance is tied 3rd/4th in EUROPE. KHL team budgets are 3-4 times larger than in SHL, yet the ticket prices are 3,4 or 5 times SMALLER than in SHL.

Actually i do understand the politics well enough, Croatia Czech republic and Russia were in the same freaking system for some 50 odd years. Its different now but not that different at the same time.
But you are wrong there seams to be a clear tendency to change and westernize their style of running the clubs and the league. And by westernize i mean make it more NHL style. Closing the league is the first step. And they want to be a NHL contender or atleast to be a good option for talent to stay/come to KHL instead of NHL.
The ticket thing is why (partly) i said it will never be a true franchise but a sort of a hybrid. With bigger arenas and need for work with the fans and better marketing, being creative and so on it would bring in more people. At first it will be quantity vs quality(price). That will bring new stabile revenue. As the Russian standard grows in a certain region and in general tickets will go higher.
Also SHL while they have higher ticket prices and higher buying power you are forgetting they have much higher taxes on everything, so what a team gets from it is probably the same as russian clubs. Its just not that simple.
US has lower taxes than most of EU/Russia and higher buying power.

Noting the issues/problems doesn't mean they suck period.


That culture being political. Sports was used as a political tool during the Cold War era. It's the same with Belarus, though in a slightly different sense (dictator/president being a big hockey fan).

Agreed but Namejs was only being negative and said the KHL sucks and is a third rate league so...

YOu hit the nail right on the head there. It still brings prestige, attention and marketing to the country big time. Cold war or no Cold war it is still as important.

 

[obskyr]

Tickets for Metallurg Nk games are like $8 for relatively good seats. That's why the worst and poorest team in the league always has 5x Spartak or CSKA attendance.

I don't get your point, both Nk and CSKA have comparably low ticket prices and poor attendance. That only shows the state of hockey in Moscow.