NHL Expansion back on agenda?

  • PLEASE check any bookmark on all devices. IF you see a link pointing to mandatory.com DELETE it Please use this URL https://forums.hfboards.com/

um

Registered User
Sep 4, 2008
16,001
5,912
toronto
GTA2/Hamilton, Virginia Beach keeps sniffing around, they could flip Nashville to the Eastern Conference, at an extreme stretch, Indianapolis or Cincinnati, there are a couple things they can do if needed. Or, tbh, just live with 35 until something makes sense.
GTA 2 with Bell being the owner would be something.
 

uhlaw97

Registered User
Jun 8, 2011
192
58
Katy, TX
Given that Fertitta owns the arena inside which any hypothetical Houston NHL franchise would play, it is a given that he will need to be at least the 51% owner of any such franchise.

Perhaps he can get a bunch of other local investors together and come up with a bid no other city or potential owner can match.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Voight

voyageur

Hockey fanatic
Jul 10, 2011
9,996
8,828
Tampa though is an established brand of 30 years, with an established fan base (and Stanley Cup winning pedigree) so I would expect them to be valued more than an expansion team in Houston or Atlanta.

But yeah - maybe Fertitta is trying to hold them to something closer to $1.2 billion, and the NHL is trying to go higher.
If the value of an expansion franchise is a $1 billion, he would have bought the Coyotes before Ryan Smith did. NHL would have taken $1 billion for that team to play in a full arena in a market that fit its needs.


I think Fertitta's number is considerably lower than a $1 billion. I don't think he wanted to get in at $500 million when the NHL was sniffing at the market. Maybe now, but seems like he doesn't think an NHL franchise is worth all that much. And maybe the numbers being thrown out are inflated, based on 2 recent sales.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaveG and TheLegend

AtlantaWhaler

Thrash/Preds/Sabres
Jul 3, 2009
20,095
3,331
The Braves kinda did it first though
Not at all. They even had the St Louis Cardinals as consultants since there’s is/was so successful

And I realize this is a stretch, but many arenas like Bridgestone and anything in Vegas are already surrounded by similar developments. Older venues like Fenway have had entertainment venues moving into surrounding spaces for a long time. It’s not a new concept.
 
Last edited:

Tawnos

A guy with a bass
Sep 10, 2004
29,256
11,074
Charlotte, NC
Not at all. They even had the St Louis Cardinals as consultants since there’s is/was so successful

And I realize this is a stretch, but many arenas like Bridgestone and anything in Vegas are already surrounded by similar developments. Older venues like Fenway have had entertainment venues moving into surrounding spaces for a long time. It’s not a new concept.

I do think there's a distinction that needs to be made in the "mini city" concept. And that's residential. Most of the projects now include more than just entertainment and retail.

But to your point, it's not a new concept. Hell, IIRC Phase 2 of Westgate in Glendale was supposed to include residential and that goes back over 15 years. I think apartments eventually got built, but someone else can confirm or refute.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaveG

aqib

Registered User
Feb 13, 2012
5,480
1,520

"The NHL would be great in Houston, and they're looking to expand," Fertitta said at the unveiling of the Memorial Herman Houston Rockets Training Facility. "We're hoping that no team right now meets the price that they want [for] the expansion team. We're hoping somehow we can get the team by being one the best cities in America and paying the right price."

The price keeps rising. He could have had the Coyotes if he had been willing to pay the $1.2B that Smith paid. I keep pointing out he lost the bidding for the Rockets because he bid $80 million and Alexander bid $85 million. He winds up buying them years later for $2.2 billion. He's repeaating the error.
 

dj4aces

An Intricate Piece of Infinity
Dec 17, 2007
6,466
1,568
Duluth, GA
The Braves kinda did it first though
I think the Braves "did it first" only in terms of a fully constructed development in the suburbs. The Braves proved that anyone could move from downtown to the 'burbs so long as you build it and the market supports it. That's what kinda made people sit up and take notice, and in many ways, proved the point some of us Atlanta area residents have been saying about this city for over a decade.

This concept (mixed-use developments with a major league anchor in the suburbs) only works in a few places, with Atlanta being one of them. The city of Atlanta only has an estimated population of 510k right now (which would actually be a historical high in terms of population within the city limits. That means the remaining population live outside of downtown, with the majority of that population living north of the city.
 

Yukon Joe

Registered User
Aug 3, 2011
6,767
4,789
YWG -> YXY -> YEG
Bell is broke. They sold their part of MLSE because they have enormous amounts of debt. They were downgraded to just above junk bonds last week.

Far be it for me to be a BCE cheerleader, but BCE's debt is problematic, but I would hardly call the company "broke" - in particular after raising this much cash from selling its share of MLSE.

But you're right - BCE hardly seems to be in the mood to be investing in a Toronto2 franchise.
 

StreetHawk

Registered User
Sep 30, 2017
28,210
10,849
The price keeps rising. He could have had the Coyotes if he had been willing to pay the $1.2B that Smith paid. I keep pointing out he lost the bidding for the Rockets because he bid $80 million and Alexander bid $85 million. He winds up buying them years later for $2.2 billion. He's repeaating the error.
Atl seems like a like for expansion. 2 parties want to replicate the battery for an indoor arena.
Houston, unless someone else steps up to replicate what the Atl bids are doing, it’s down to Fertitia. NHL clubs are not tenants to an arena controlled by an NBA owner. Nash is a tenant to the city run Bridgestone Arena.
 

ponder719

The same New Era as before
Jul 2, 2013
7,299
10,109
Philadelphia, PA
Far be it for me to be a BCE cheerleader, but BCE's debt is problematic, but I would hardly call the company "broke" - in particular after raising this much cash from selling its share of MLSE.

But you're right - BCE hardly seems to be in the mood to be investing in a Toronto2 franchise.

And if they did, for whatever reason, want to get back into NHL ownership (which there is plenty of reason to doubt) there are substantially cheaper ways to do that than to try and muscle their way back into the Toronto media market.
 

aqib

Registered User
Feb 13, 2012
5,480
1,520
Far be it for me to be a BCE cheerleader, but BCE's debt is problematic, but I would hardly call the company "broke" - in particular after raising this much cash from selling its share of MLSE.

But you're right - BCE hardly seems to be in the mood to be investing in a Toronto2 franchise.
BCE still owns a stake in the Habs. Even when they bought into MLSE they had to split their ownership interest between BCE and the Bell Pension Fund to keep it under 30%. So they won't be the main owner of another team. They could be an investor in QC or Montreal NBA.
 

Yukon Joe

Registered User
Aug 3, 2011
6,767
4,789
YWG -> YXY -> YEG
And if they did, for whatever reason, want to get back into NHL ownership (which there is plenty of reason to doubt) there are substantially cheaper ways to do that than to try and muscle their way back into the Toronto media market.

But sports ownership, by itself, is a far way from BCE's core competencies of being a telecom / media company. The only reason for a BCE to want to own a sports franchise is because of the synergies involved with owning a media company. In Canada, the biggest media market (by far) is Toronto.

There'd be no benefit to BCE to owning a franchise in Quebec.

BCE is different from Rogers in that it is not dominated by a single shareholder, where individual ego may insist on owning a team even if not otherwise a great investment.
 

Yukon Joe

Registered User
Aug 3, 2011
6,767
4,789
YWG -> YXY -> YEG
BCE still owns a stake in the Habs. Even when they bought into MLSE they had to split their ownership interest between BCE and the Bell Pension Fund to keep it under 30%. So they won't be the main owner of another team. They could be an investor in QC or Montreal NBA.

But why? The advantage to owning a share of MLSE is they guaranteed local rights to half of all Raptors and Leafs games. They've now locked down those rights for the next 20 years anyways. They also have the rights to English and french Canadiens games.

Would securing the rights to Montreal NBA tv rights really be worth the $3-4 billion a franchise in Montreal would cost? Quebec NHL rights would be worth even less, as I'd think there'd be little demand in English, thus only being meaningful to RDS in French.


Edit: the difference with Rogers being that A: there is a single owner who maybe just enjoys owning sports teams, and B: they do have some corporate experience owning sports franchises through their ownership of the Jays.
 

TheLegend

Hardly Deactivated
Aug 30, 2009
37,771
30,815
Buzzing BoH
If the value of an expansion franchise is a $1 billion, he would have bought the Coyotes before Ryan Smith did. NHL would have taken $1 billion for that team to play in a full arena in a market that fit its needs.


I think Fertitta's number is considerably lower than a $1 billion. I don't think he wanted to get in at $500 million when the NHL was sniffing at the market. Maybe now, but seems like he doesn't think an NHL franchise is worth all that much. And maybe the numbers being thrown out are inflated, based on 2 recent sales.

Technically SLC entry was $1.2 billion.

That said..... it's this simple.....

The NHL sees Houston as a bigger market than Salt Lake City. Therefore they see Houston commanding a higher franchise entry price than they would SLC.

Plus.... I'm believing more each day that the decision to move the Coyotes to SLC started right after the arena vote in Tempe failed and it was apparent that Alex Meruelo did not have a solid backup plan in place. At that point Houston wasn't even on the radar (the new ice system going in his arena hadn't even begun yet) and Fertitta continues doubling down on wanting in cheap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaveG and dj4aces

aqib

Registered User
Feb 13, 2012
5,480
1,520
But why? The advantage to owning a share of MLSE is they guaranteed local rights to half of all Raptors and Leafs games. They've now locked down those rights for the next 20 years anyways. They also have the rights to English and french Canadiens games.

Would securing the rights to Montreal NBA tv rights really be worth the $3-4 billion a franchise in Montreal would cost? Quebec NHL rights would be worth even less, as I'd think there'd be little demand in English, thus only being meaningful to RDS in French.


Edit: the difference with Rogers being that A: there is a single owner who maybe just enjoys owning sports teams, and B: they do have some corporate experience owning sports franchises through their ownership of the Jays.

They wouldn't have to own the entire Montreal NBA team. They could be part owners.

Also, people keep assuming that owning teams is just a vanity purchase. With the explosion of outlets seeking content and expansion of gambling there is so much more revenue flowing to teams. You didn't have 4 groups bidding almost a billion for the Ottawa Senators because its cool to be hanging out in the owners box in Ottawa.
 

TheLegend

Hardly Deactivated
Aug 30, 2009
37,771
30,815
Buzzing BoH
The price keeps rising. He could have had the Coyotes if he had been willing to pay the $1.2B that Smith paid. I keep pointing out he lost the bidding for the Rockets because he bid $80 million and Alexander bid $85 million. He winds up buying them years later for $2.2 billion. He's repeaating the error.

As I indicated above.... I think the NHL has a much higher number in mind for Houston than $1.2 billion.
 

BMN

Registered User
Jun 2, 2021
362
484
This concept (mixed-use developments with a major league anchor in the suburbs) only works in a few places, with Atlanta being one of them. The city of Atlanta only has an estimated population of 510k right now (which would actually be a historical high in terms of population within the city limits. That means the remaining population live outside of downtown, with the majority of that population living north of the city.
Or as a friend of mine liked to say: "Atlanta is the city that threw up all over itself."

The cities/counties are close enough to each other to form a cohesive (and powerful) media market, far enough apart to create distinct challenges in terms of attendance. I mean, it's commonly understood by most people that there are a lot of cities where when you say "name of city," you could be meaning the actual city or meaning "the metro." I know Atlanta is not wholly unique in this regard (the challenges Phoenix presented being immediate proof enough). But I would argue it might be the most exaggerated example of the phenomenon.

I was a proud ITPer (actual city of Atlanta) the whole time and whenever I went to Alpharetta, Marietta, Kennesaw, etc. etc., it wasn't just that I was visiting another city in the legal/"on paper" sense of the word but very much psychologically. Did I know many people that lived in these places that came into town to work with me? Sure. But actually going to those areas was tantamount to a mini roadtrip (and that's coming from someone who raised in a Canadian city where a five hour drive to Halifax was a casual weekend suggestion you might make on a Friday morning...).

That said, the "on paper" of it is pretty overwhelming too: the Metro Atlanta Mayors Association encompasses 70 cities and 10 counties (and many people count more than this when they define ATL as a TV market).

I really meant what I said here: This wouldn't be "the third time in Atlanta," it would be the FIRST time in north metro. And even then, keep in mind, this is talking about why the attendance portion of the equation could be very different. How to actually make this team a hit on television/radio/digital is a whole other conversation.
 

BMN

Registered User
Jun 2, 2021
362
484
As I indicated above.... I think the NHL has a much higher number in mind for Houston than $1.2 billion.
If Fertitta wants/wanted the NHL that badly, he really should have aggressively tried to jump Utah in the line because that's the only way he was going to get a number smaller than that (if he even stood a chance of getting a smaller number at all). I have to say that it's a fascinating impasse between a league of owners' desire to be in all of the major media markets and also not wanting to undermine the growth of franchise values (perceived or otherwise).
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaveG

TheLegend

Hardly Deactivated
Aug 30, 2009
37,771
30,815
Buzzing BoH
If Fertitta wants/wanted the NHL that badly, he really should have aggressively tried to jump Utah in the line because that's the only way he was going to get a number smaller than that (if he even stood a chance of getting a smaller number at all). I have to say that it's a fascinating impasse between a league of owners' desire to be in all of the major media markets and also not wanting to undermine the growth of franchise values (perceived or otherwise).

Don’t think his arena’s new ice system was in the works at the time when the league began talking to Ryan Smith.

But it’s interesting that he didn’t try throwing his hat in.

Or maybe he did and it was still a low ball offer.??
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaveG

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad