Both cities lost franchises before I was born and I’m not exactly young anymore. There are only a handful of NHLers older than me. I don’t see how either are relevant in 2024.
NHL Board of Governors to approve opening of expansion process; Atlanta and Houston believed to be leading candidates
- Thread starter Koivu11
- Start date
Both cities lost franchises before I was born and I’m not exactly young anymore. There are only a handful of NHLers older than me. I don’t see how either are relevant in 2024.
teravaineSAROS
Registered User
- Jul 29, 2015
- 3,882
- 1,587
100%. There are so many decent players (not superstars obviously) in Europe/KHL and probably in the AHL aswell who could find a role in the NHL.
Everytime we have an expansion somebody like William Karlsson or McCann suddenly gets an opportunity to emerge.
Also with the potential talent dilution the superstars will end up standing out even more. I thought fans enjoyed the increase in scoring but now it's sudddenly a problem because people just feel the need to be negative?
The Gr8 Dane
L'harceleur
coming from a sens fan is crazy you guys make the league no money whatsoever , only arizona generate less revenue than you and they have just ceased to exist
The Gr8 Dane
L'harceleur
Not everybody enjoys the inflated increased scoring. And not everyone wants a watered down league. Some of us enjoy watching the cream of the crop compete against eachother. So you can understand why people don't want 50ish non NHLers joining the league
They got the Rangers to accept the Islanders and Devils. Crazy to me that the Leafs would be capable of blocking this.
dj4aces
An Intricate Piece of Infinity
They convinced the Rangers to accept the Isles, with indemnification, because the WHA was viewed as a threat.
As for the Rangers (and Isles, and Flyers) accepting the Devils, it took years of negotiation between the four organizations before something was finally settled and the Rockies were able to move east. Again, indemnification. The Devils paid out a hefty sum.
Considering how valuable the Leafs media market is, it won't be cheap. Rest assured, MLSE will want every penny they feel they deserve.
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
I don’t really see how decisions 40-50 years ago are relevant, TBH. The Leafs are a $3B company that brings $300m revenue in each year. The economics are different.
Whalers Fan
Go Habs!
Denver and Salt Lake City have that region covered. Don't think Boise is big enough. It's metropolitan area is about 750,000 people.
njdevils1982
Hell Toupée!!!
yep. the devils paid 12.5M to the rangers, islanders and flyers... (40.8M in 2024 dollars)
dj4aces
An Intricate Piece of Infinity
While I agree that Boise is small and covered by Utah and Colorado, Boise is growing at a pretty decent clip. It's population went up by over 100k (616k -> 764k) between 2010 and 2020, and is estimated to have increased by another 100k (to 865k) in just the four years since.
If this growth continues (and let's be honest here, most of that growth is folks from California -- and most of that from LA) and they can get companies to move their regional HQs to the area, they could be competing for a team in ten years or so.
Clint Eastwood
Eff the Habs
I don't think the talent will be diluted or anything like that. It's not right now and 2 more teams won't make the difference
but I feel like this will lead to the NHL eventually adding a play-in round for the playoffs which . . .
but I feel like this will lead to the NHL eventually adding a play-in round for the playoffs which . . .
hockey20000
Registered User
- Dec 23, 2018
- 4,885
- 2,909
coming from a montreal fan whos fans usually got the biggest egos in the league mind your own buisness lol
- Aug 24, 2011
- 28,705
- 13,717
It's not a Ponzi Scheme when you're generating revenue and making money. Houston and Atlanta are going to have butts in seats. There's tangible output there. You're misusing "Ponzi Scheme" like a highschooler on Reddit. The NHL is expecting ATL and HOU to do well, they're not setting up them up to fail or just taking their money and hoping for the best. They're major metro areas with lots of revenue potential.
I'd argue that putting a team in Quebec would be much more ponzi-esque, personally. If they had some guy there willing to fork over the fee$ and accepted it knowing that the market most likely won't do well due to lack of corporate sponsorship. Just taking his money and not caring about the results.
Might as well shorten the draft to four rounds too…because late firsts and beyond are going to be worth jack shit. 35th overall, while technically still a first, is just a crapshoot at that point.
They’ll only stop expansion when the league hits 83 teams and the regular season consists of playing the other 82 teams once each. Playoff will be expanded to 64 - no 68! teams - and will resemble the NCAA basketball tourney. Single elimination for the first two rounds. Then two rounds of best of five. Then two rounds of best of seven!
They’ll only stop expansion when the league hits 83 teams and the regular season consists of playing the other 82 teams once each. Playoff will be expanded to 64 - no 68! teams - and will resemble the NCAA basketball tourney. Single elimination for the first two rounds. Then two rounds of best of five. Then two rounds of best of seven!
- Aug 24, 2011
- 28,705
- 13,717
They'll have to. Having a league of 34-36 teams where less than half make the playoffs is a bad sell. It'll probably something like 1-6 seeds are guaranteed their spots and then there's a single elim round or mini-tourney between the 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, & 12 seeds from each conference. The 1-6 seeds get a week of rest and then the normal playoffs start (and the SCF ends at the end of JuneI don't think the talent will be diluted or anything like that. It's not right now and 2 more teams won't make the difference
but I feel like this will lead to the NHL eventually adding a play-in round for the playoffs which . . .
)
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
Hi. I'm a Jackets and Preds fan. Would you prefer I say it instead? I can if that helps.
If your Ponzi Scheme sells hotdogs and $20 beers, it’s still a Ponzi Scheme. A scam creating value and having identifiable value doesn’t mean it’s not a scam, in fact that’s probably the sign of a good scam. Putting a hockey team in Houston isn’t a scam, the scam is charging someone a billion dollars for the privilege of putting a hockey team in Houston when half the league has been kept alive by revenue sharing for decades.
Houston and Atlanta (third times the charm, eh? That’s not ringing your Ponzi Scheme bell when Quebec would?) have every chance to be successful as NHL markets. A $250m expansion fee and I’m not writing this post. But the franchise valuations and $1bn price tag are absolutely Looney Tunes and that’s what the scam is. The guys buying in are getting played, the current owners love it because they get a big check in the mail and everybody’s franchise valuation has gone up 10x since Vegas joined, and then in a decade when people start to realize a middle-market NHL team doesn’t make anywhere near the kind of profit that justifies those billion dollar valuations, we’re going to have five or six teams fold and a shitload of lawsuits.
The NHL kept the Coyotes on life support for a decade. They don’t give a shit about the results, they’ll do anything to keep a team from folding, because that would be devastating to everyone’s franchise value.
Golden_Jet
Registered User
- Sep 21, 2005
- 26,029
- 13,438
It’s not a Ponzi scheme, by your definition of beers, hotdogs etc, all pro leagues are ponzi schemes lol.
Boise eventually could be in the market for team but think it's years away possibly decade.
cptjeff
Reprehensible User
It's pretty clear you don't actually know what a ponzi scheme is. It's not simply a fancy word for "scam".
This might help:
The NHL's profitability is derived nearly entirely from traditional legitimate business activities- ticket sales, hot dog sales, TV contracts, advertising. The expansion money is candy on top. For the Ponzi scheme charge to be in any way remotely accurate, the expansion money would have to be the primary source of revenue keeping the NHL afloat. That's just manifestly not anywhere remotely close to the case.
Bitcoin is a nice example of a Ponzi scheme. Sports leagues are not.
dj4aces
An Intricate Piece of Infinity
First... how many teams are actually receiving revenue sharing, and can you provide data that shows it? Serious request, not just trying to be cheeky.
Second, revenue sharing was put in place to ensure stability for the league's franchises. While the 1990s was a time of expansion for the NHL, it was also a time of relocation. Quebec to Colorado, Winnipeg to Phoenix, Hartford to Carolina, and we damn near watched Edmonton move to Houston. While revenue sharing wouldn't have saved all those franchises, they would've helped greatly to ensure stability.
Third, people keep mentioning Quebec without realizing the biggest barrier of entry back into that market right now: Ownership. Stop me if you've heard this before: PKP is seeking investors. He was seeking them in 2023, 2022, 2021 .... all the way back to 2018. He doesn't have what it takes to buy in right now, and unless he finds investors, he'll still be looking for them when the league announces expansion from 34 to 36.
Fourth, the Coyotes were "kept on life support", sure, but there's a very good reason for it, and it goes back to my second point: Stability. Atlanta was already moving in 2011, and it would've taken a literal act of God to stop it. Atlanta Spirit owned the building and the team, and they didn't want the team playing in their building. But in Arizona, Glendale owned the building. There was more that could be done to keep that franchise there than was ever possible with the Thrashers in Atlanta. Had the NHL allowed the Coyotes and the Thrashers to move in the same offseason, it would've hurt the NHL and its brand, because it would've indicated to the at-large public and investors alike that the idea of stability was just a facade made of little more than paper mache.
Fifth? Stop misusing "ponzi scheme". I hope this is at least one point everyone can agree on.
FoxYou727
Registered User
Boise probably won't get a team but the 3 reasons why I think it could be worth a shot:
1. Will have a monopoly of the state of Idaho
2. First pro sports team in that state + will have instant rivals in Colorado and Utah
3. Growing population
2. Add Seattle depending if they get team be in Pacific or Central division.
The very first sentence of your definition is exactly what is happening with expansion fees. This is hilarious that you're telling me I don't know what they are when there's one right in front of your eyes.
"(A Ponzi Scheme) is a form of fraud that lures investors and pays profits to earlier investors with funds from more recent investors."
Wow, that sounds exactly like expansion fees, which are paid to earlier teams from more recent investors.
The NHL is not a Ponzi Scheme. Expansion driving franchise values through the roof ARE. A legitimate business can morph into a Ponzi Scheme, while retaining the legitimate portions. This really isn't rocket science, nor is it impossible that one blurs into the other.
I literally do not care that a bunch of people are telling me that I'm using Ponzi Scheme wrong. I know what one is, I know that this expansion is quickly turning into one because the NHL cannot get their hands out of the free money cookie jar, and I am telling you all that the Emperor has no clothes.
