NHL to Atlanta odds just increased significantly

Status
Not open for further replies.

dj4aces

An Intricate Piece of Infinity
Dec 17, 2007
6,537
1,625
Duluth, GA
Totally agree. It's going to be a long road still for the NHL to confirm a team in Atlanta. For me, I'm still nervous about this ownership group. I believe the main guy is just a car dealership guy. Sure he's rich, but there's a monster difference between millionaire and billionaire. I'm also nervous about a bunch of owners coming together. We all saw how great that worked out before...
Agreed. One thousand times this. I want to see a lot more details on Krause Sports and Entertainment before I feel the least bit comfortable about it. A lot more goes into it than simply being willing to cut a check for $1bn (or more).
 
  • Like
Reactions: AtlantaWhaler

FlyguyOX

Registered User
Jun 29, 2018
4,278
4,262
Well... like I said in another post, it's possible they could've played out of Gas South Arena, here in Duluth, but I don't know if the league would've even allowed that at the time. It seats roughly 11k for hockey, and is also the home of the Atlanta Gladiators (ECHL).

If that situation happened today, I think the league would be more amenable to allowing a team to play out of Gas South (assuming they could secure a lease) on a temporary basis. It's small for a NHL rink, but seats nearly 3x the people as Mullett. But it's also important to remember that's not the only reason the Thrashers were sold off and shipped out as quickly as they were.
Gas South needs some serious work at this point. My brother played a mens league game there last year (I think Derek Nesbitt the Glad's all-time leading scorer joined their team for the game which was neat) and the seats in that arena are pure shite now. It would definitely need some renovations even for a temporary home IMO
 

AintLifeGrand

Burnin Jet-A
Apr 8, 2009
5,975
2,110
GreatestSnowOnEarth
Yes.. their port is one of the worlds largest, they have more Fortune 500 companies based there than any city other than NYC and their GDP is $633 bn (7th largest in the US).
Port of Savannah is bigger.

Advantage Atlanta

 
  • Like
Reactions: FlyguyOX

Voight

#winning
Feb 8, 2012
42,032
18,569
Mulberry Street
The other part of keeping the Coyotes in Arizona is that they've learned that expansion is much more profitable than relocation. Why would they relocate the Coyotes to SLC or Atlanta for not a billion dollars when they could offer an expansion team for a billion dollars?

Ultimately people here treat relocation like a desirable thing, in reality it's the NHL's last resort.

Technically the league can charge whatever they want for a relocation fee. So let's say Smith buys the Yotes and moves them to SLC, they could in theory charge him say $500million via relocation fee.

I totally disagree. Again...QC is watching hockey already and is a market of 800K. Exposing a new, 6.1 million person market to the game would add WAY more revenue.


Again, I disagree. The NFL, which absolutely crushes the other big-3 in ratings and revenue, keeps looking for more ways to grow revenue. They've gotten all over streaming and within the next 5 years, there will be a team in London. There is never enough high population markets.

And I'm not understanding this "decrease product quality" stuff. How does a team in Atlanta decrease emotion (or whatever)?

I don't wanna derail the thread, but this will likely never happen, especially not within the next 5 years.

Port of Savannah is bigger.

Advantage Atlanta


Uhh... no it's not. Try again.

Port of Houston is #1 in the US, Savannah is 13th in terms of tonnage, it doesn't hold a candle to Houston.

Savannah is also 4 hours away from Atlanta so you can't group those two together.
 
Last edited:

FlyguyOX

Registered User
Jun 29, 2018
4,278
4,262
Totally agree. It's going to be a long road still for the NHL to confirm a team in Atlanta. For me, I'm still nervous about this ownership group. I believe the main guy is just a car dealership guy. Sure he's rich, but there's a monster difference between millionaire and billionaire. I'm also nervous about a bunch of owners coming together. We all saw how great that worked out before...
Interesting article:

"Plans for The Gathering at South Forsyth development will include a 700,000-square-foot arena, with the County’s investment commencing with the award of an NHL expansion team."
"The developer is also committed to developing a community ice center with ice for hockey and skating (at a location to be determined)."


I didn't know that about a new ice center. There's definitely a need for more ice time in the city so that should only help grow the sport as well.
 

thegoldenyear

RIP Mike Bossy
May 13, 2013
2,379
1,367
Toronto
When I first began watching hockey, only a dozen years before the still-active Jagr joined the league, the NHL was in the process of contracting to 17 teams. Now we’re looking at 17 per conference.

Heck, there may even be a roster spot for Jagr in this bloat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Devonator

AtlantaWhaler

Thrash/Preds/Sabres
Jul 3, 2009
20,212
3,456
I don't wanna derail the thread, but this will likely never happen, especially not within the next 5 years.



Uhh... no it's not. Try again.

Port of Houston is #1 in the US, Savannah is 13th in terms of tonnage, it doesn't hold a candle to Houston.
Unless the players put up enough of a fight (which they certainly may), there's a reason why Jacksonville is playing yet another London game next year.

And, yes. The Port of Savannah is bigger, based on their standard measure (TEU's).
LA, NY/NJ, Long Beach (which I would combine with LA), Savannah, Houston.
 

Voight

#winning
Feb 8, 2012
42,032
18,569
Mulberry Street
Unless the players put up enough of a fight (which they certainly may), there's a reason why Jacksonville is playing yet another London game next year.

And, yes. The Port of Savannah is bigger, based on their standard measure (TEU's).
LA, NY/NJ, Long Beach (which I would combine with LA), Savannah, Houston.

I highly doubt the NFL will relocate an American team to London. NFLPA will fight that to the death anyways, players are not going to wanna move somewhere with a completely different culture and lifestyle. Nevermind the logistical headaches for travel.

In terms of tonnage, Houston is bigger. Regardless, the Port of Savannah is 4 hours from Atlanta so I don't know why that poster brought it up. It's not relevant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: biturbo19

AintLifeGrand

Burnin Jet-A
Apr 8, 2009
5,975
2,110
GreatestSnowOnEarth
Technically the league can charge whatever they want for a relocation fee. So let's say Smith buys the Yotes and moves them to SLC, they could in theory charge him say $500million via relocation fee.



I don't wanna derail the thread, but this will likely never happen, especially not within the next 5 years.



Uhh... no it's not. Try again.

Port of Houston is #1 in the US, Savannah is 13th in terms of tonnage, it doesn't hold a candle to Houston.

Savannah is also 4 hours away from Atlanta so you can't group those two together.
no its not… outside of the tri cities and maybe Long Beach Savannah is the most vital port in the country

I highly doubt the NFL will relocate an American team to London. NFLPA will fight that to the death anyways, players are not going to wanna move somewhere with a completely different culture and lifestyle. Nevermind the logistical headaches for travel.

In terms of tonnage, Houston is bigger. Regardless, the Port of Savannah is 4 hours from Atlanta so I don't know why that poster brought it up. It's not relevant.
Port of Houston is like 3 hrs from the Woodlands

I used to live in Savannah I could get into the city from North Atlanta in about 3.5 hrs
 

AtlantaWhaler

Thrash/Preds/Sabres
Jul 3, 2009
20,212
3,456
I highly doubt the NFL will relocate an American team to London. NFLPA will fight that to the death anyways, players are not going to wanna move somewhere with a completely different culture and lifestyle. Nevermind the logistical headaches for travel.

In terms of tonnage, Houston is bigger. Regardless, the Port of Savannah is 4 hours from Atlanta so I don't know why that poster brought it up. It's not relevant.
Yeah, players will likely shoot it down, but the point still stands. The NFL will constantly figure out ways to add revenue.

And having the 4th largest/busiest port in the country 4 hours away, within the same state certainly matters to the economy (which was the topic). Most of those goods funnel up to warehouses throughout Atlanta. The economic impact is HUGE. Adds lots of jobs and corporate money.
 

Voight

#winning
Feb 8, 2012
42,032
18,569
Mulberry Street
But why wouldn't the new potential owners build their own arena there?

Isn't that what happened in Vegas? They built the arena to host an NHL team.

Andlauer bought the sens and is in plans to build a new arena.

Just play at a smaller arena until the new one is ready like a university arena in the area or junior team or minor league team, etc. Arizona is doing it.

Vegas had the advantage of being Vegas. I.e T Mobile was going to be filled with events even if they didn't get a hockey team.

Atlanta has a major arena downtown so this one in the suburbs is a different story. Sans NHL team, they don't have the luxury of booking tons of major events.

I also don't think the NHL would want TWO teams playing in small arenas. Not a great look.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dj4aces

Essenege

Registered User
Oct 5, 2019
1,105
1,153
I totally disagree. Again...QC is watching hockey already and is a market of 800K. Exposing a new, 6.1 million person market to the game would add WAY more revenue.

Screw Atlanta, let’s expand in Tokyo instead if total population count is what drives ad revenues.

TV ad revenues are driven by number of people watching the games. If you can’t concede more people will watch a Quebec-Tampa Bay game then Atlanta-Tamps Bay game, then you’re delusional.

10 years down the road? Maybe if the team is wildly successful…but even then it’s highly doubtful.
 
Last edited:

AtlantaWhaler

Thrash/Preds/Sabres
Jul 3, 2009
20,212
3,456
Screw Atlanta, let’s expand in Tokyo instead if total population count is what drives ad revenues.

TV ad revenues are driven by number of people watching the games. If you can’t concede more people will watch a Quebec-Tampa Bay game then Atlanta-Tamps Bay game, then you’re delusional.

10 years down the road? Maybe if the team is wildly successful…but even then it’s highly doubtful.
That's a huge part of it, but, solely based on TV revenue, why put a team in a market where they're already watching hockey? I'm not arguing that QC doesn't add to ratings, but, in theory, the next contract wouldn't go as far up because they added to a market where rating wouldn't grow as much. Are you saying that the additions of Seattle and Vegas won't add TV revenue?
 
  • Like
Reactions: biturbo19

tucker3434

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Apr 7, 2007
20,294
11,352
Atlanta, GA
But why wouldn't the new potential owners build their own arena there?

Isn't that what happened in Vegas? They built the arena to host an NHL team.

Andlauer bought the sens and is in plans to build a new arena.

Just play at a smaller arena until the new one is ready like a university arena in the area or junior team or minor league team, etc. Arizona is doing it.

Timing. Risk.

If the Yotes change hands again before they get a permanent AZ home sorted out, they’re relocating too. Nobody wants to pay hundreds of millions of dollars and have that kind of extreme uncertainty hanging over them.

As you said, Vegas built the arena before getting a team. They don’t win the expansion bid and only then figure out how/where/when they’d build an arena. It’s kinda what Atlanta is trying to do right now.

Ottawa has a building that, to my knowledge, they could play in indefinitely while any and all red tape is sorted out. Their need of an arena doesn’t come close to what Atlanta’s did or Arizona’s does.
 

biturbo19

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
27,222
12,364
The impact of the Nordiques on the next tv deal is on the supply side, not demand. The national TV deal would now contain 2 weekend games in the province of Quebec instead of one. A lot would watch both.

This additional game would generate more ad revenues in the foreseeable future then any ad revenue generated for a game in Atlanta. the local corporations have nothing to do, I mean Montreal / Toronto based companies that sell products in Quebec have to reach out to them somehow.

your growth argument is fine, I just think right now the league has enough of high population / low penetration market, it decreases the overall emotion/stakes in the games and decrease product quality.

That's not really how it works though. Advertisers spend on the perceived demand. And the problem with Quebec is compounded by the Francophone nature of it all. Montreal has a far more bilingual draw for advertisers and TV deals. There are Habs fans literally everywhere. Nordiques fans? You're going to have a relatively small Anglophone market draw...which limits the broadcasters and advertisers that even want to get involved and the dollars they're willing to sink into it. You're drawing a lot from exactly the same pool that are already putting their dollars behind French broadcasts of existing games on RDS/TVA whatever.

And as far as two weekend games for Habs/Nordiques...you might get two, but they're very likely at the same time on Saturday night. That has no "value added" for advertisers or broadcasters. It's just internal competition.

Totally agree. It's going to be a long road still for the NHL to confirm a team in Atlanta. For me, I'm still nervous about this ownership group. I believe the main guy is just a car dealership guy. Sure he's rich, but there's a monster difference between millionaire and billionaire. I'm also nervous about a bunch of owners coming together. We all saw how great that worked out before...

Yeah. This is why i think it's important to not get swept away in this notion that the development getting a go-ahead as a whole, means it's a signed, sealed, delivered NHL Arena and NHL hockey team. It's a massive development that ultimately may or may not have an NHL Arena and team attached.

The key to this whole development is clearly more the whole other aspect of:

"Early plans for the rest of the Forsyth County district have called for about 1.6 million square feet of office and retail space, 450 hotel rooms, 2,400 residential units, a 100,000-square-foot community center, a new fire station, and a 1.2-mile connective trail along the Big Creek Greenway."

The Arena sounds like basically a handshake agreement MOU to provide additional funding if they do manage to land an NHL Franchise. But could easily be subbed out for whatever else and the rest of the development isn't contingent on landing an NHL Team.

It's basically the complete opposite of what say...Edmonton did with their new Roger McDavey Arena "Ice District".


View attachment 813991
Canadians finna be big mad

While we're putting it out there, can we talk about just how incredibly tacky that looks? Specifically, just plastering a big random image of an electric guitar across the entire side of a tower like that? :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: What even is that? It'd be tacky in Nashville...but at least maybe kinda sorta fit the vibe. In a random Atlanta exurb? lmao.

Also love the artistic vision of whoever put together this rendering, that only Ferraris and Porsches and Exotic Sports Cars will use this random loopy traffic circle thing in front of the rink. And they will drive in very strange patterns, basically just circling around it and maybe crashing up onto the sidewalk sometimes.



But as a serious point to that...i think it illustrates just how much this whole NHL Arena (and the hypothetical team it's contingent upon) are a tacked on side project to the greater density hub development as a whole.


Technically the league can charge whatever they want for a relocation fee. So let's say Smith buys the Yotes and moves them to SLC, they could in theory charge him say $500million via relocation fee.



I don't wanna derail the thread, but this will likely never happen, especially not within the next 5 years.



Uhh... no it's not. Try again.

Port of Houston is #1 in the US, Savannah is 13th in terms of tonnage, it doesn't hold a candle to Houston.

Savannah is also 4 hours away from Atlanta so you can't group those two together.

To be fair though, isn't a huge amount of the Port of Houston's traffic basically just oil and oil accessories?

But regardless, Atlanta is very much not on a peer level with NY/Chicago/LA. lol. It's far more on the level of something like Houston. Just different industries and things. Second tier economic centers.

Interesting article:

"Plans for The Gathering at South Forsyth development will include a 700,000-square-foot arena, with the County’s investment commencing with the award of an NHL expansion team."
"The developer is also committed to developing a community ice center with ice for hockey and skating (at a location to be determined)."


I didn't know that about a new ice center. There's definitely a need for more ice time in the city so that should only help grow the sport as well.

This is also really just more indication that this NHL component of the whole project is...flexible and tentative at this point. The whole project has assuredly run the numbers and is extremely confident in the profitability going forward with just the Community Center/Rink and turn that area slated for an NHL Arena into something else entirely. Heck, it might even be a concert hall of some sort...right next to the ugly ass giant guitar wall thing. :laugh:

Unless the players put up enough of a fight (which they certainly may), there's a reason why Jacksonville is playing yet another London game next year.

And, yes. The Port of Savannah is bigger, based on their standard measure (TEU's).
LA, NY/NJ, Long Beach (which I would combine with LA), Savannah, Houston.

The Jaguars to London thing is so much more asinine than the Thrashers to Atlanta again thing.

It's just not remotely feasible. The NFL are plenty content to just continue playing more of these one or two off games in Europe to satisfy that growth. Expanding to adding games in Germany, wherever else they think they can grow the game internationally...without moving a team there. Which would become a complete logistical nightmare.


The Jacksonville thing is basically a crock that is fueled by some weird misconceptions, speculation because the owner happens to be invested in UK Soccer and was at one point going to buy Wembley Stadium, and an agreement that is beneficial to the Jaguars for a completely different reason than it's generally portrayed.

The Jaguars owner and the City of Jacksonville have been moving along steadily with a huge investment in a project to massively develop the area around the existing Stadium. Boatloads of money in "The Shipyards" project. That's unlikely to be a move from a team that's about to move across the Atlantic.

The biggest thing with Jacksonville continuing to roll with their London agreement, is that the owner specifically sees the value in expanding his team's reach to an International Audience. It's sacrificing a couple home games of revenue in one of the smaller NFL markets...while massively expanding the reach and appeal of the brand and team viewership, merchandise sales, etc, to potentially cover the whole of the UK. Not even just in terms of international viewers...setting their games aside puts those two games out of sequence with all the other games on any given Sunday...which is something that the Jaguars have struggled with. As a smaller market and a generally terrible team for most of the last couple decades, they'd be pretty much completely removed from ANY primetime National coverage on Sunday Night Football/Monday Night Football.

It's also become a bit of a competitive advantage for the team on the field. lol. They're a lot more "used to it" than other teams. So it can end up being a bigger home field advantage than actual home field.


If the NFL makes a legitimate move to Europe...it's going to have to come in a big chunk. With an entire division of teams there or something. But in the meantime...they seem happy enough to just rake in a ton of extra revenue out of the project, continue to make inroads in those markets, and having a partner team that's invested in being a component of that a couple times a year just helps move that along smoothly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AtlantaWhaler

Essenege

Registered User
Oct 5, 2019
1,105
1,153
That's not really how it works though. Advertisers spend on the perceived demand. And the problem with Quebec is compounded by the Francophone nature of it all. Montreal has a far more bilingual draw for advertisers and TV deals.

Such an ignorant take. Weird that I’ve spent my life being bombarded by ads from US and Anglo Canada corporations on French TV.

To your point about perceived demand…there’s a reason why TV ratings exist, and it’s exactly to price ads.
 

VivaLasVegas

Registered User
Sponsor
Jun 21, 2021
7,830
8,358
Lost Wages, Nevada
Yeah. I understand sports teams valuations aren’t based on their economic viability but on whatever the local billionaire is willing to pay for it. It sucks.

At Vegas pricing back a few years ago it would have been done. Remember they paid hundreds of millions for a NHL sized arena for junior hockey…at 500M or even Seattle’s 650M it was a done deal. Now I think the group of prospective buyers led by PKP is all but priced out but I’m not even convinced about that.
Seems like Peladeau himself is also seen as problematic which would not help the situation. Quebec Nordiques: NHL urged to avoid 'unfit' Pierre Karl Péladeau
 

biturbo19

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
27,222
12,364
Such an ignorant take. Weird that I’ve spent my life being bombarded by ads from US and Anglo Canada corporations on French TV.

To your point about perceived demand…there’s a reason why TV ratings exist, and it’s exactly to price ads.

You're getting bombarded by English language ads on French TV? That seems weird.


The point is, US/Anglo companies have to value not just the ad spend, but the price of porting their advertisement to French for that specific market. It has to be worth it to them. It's not a dealbreaker, but it's a schism in the advertising markets that would be ignorant to ignore.

And at the end of the day...they're still probably reaching very nearly as many people with existing French language viewers through those broadcasters. If there's no Nordiques game on because they don't exist...a large contingent of those viewers are still watching something hockey related in French.



TV Ratings are also becoming a fairly antiquated metric anyway. Nielsen has trouble tracking accurately in a world where digital content delivery is huge and multimedia intake patterns are shifting dramatically.

It's why so many companies are shifting big dollars toward social media and other online advertising over more traditional forms.

And that's to say nothing of all the other crap we've had foisted upon us, like digitally superimposed regional advertising on broadcasts, and what that means for Francophone sponsor ads on the boards and the ice, or the stupid helmet ads which are going to narrow in suitors for a team that needs to cross that language barrier. It just adds an extra layer of complexity to what "value" a QC team adds.
 

bigoleterry

Registered User
Jun 27, 2022
9
17
Agreed. One thousand times this. I want to see a lot more details on Krause Sports and Entertainment before I feel the least bit comfortable about it. A lot more goes into it than simply being willing to cut a check for $1bn (or more).
Rumors are Joe Rogers Jr (billionaire former ceo of Waffle House) is also involved
 

bigoleterry

Registered User
Jun 27, 2022
9
17
That's not really how it works though. Advertisers spend on the perceived demand. And the problem with Quebec is compounded by the Francophone nature of it all. Montreal has a far more bilingual draw for advertisers and TV deals. There are Habs fans literally everywhere. Nordiques fans? You're going to have a relatively small Anglophone market draw...which limits the broadcasters and advertisers that even want to get involved and the dollars they're willing to sink into it. You're drawing a lot from exactly the same pool that are already putting their dollars behind French broadcasts of existing games on RDS/TVA whatever.

And as far as two weekend games for Habs/Nordiques...you might get two, but they're very likely at the same time on Saturday night. That has no "value added" for advertisers or broadcasters. It's just internal competition.



Yeah. This is why i think it's important to not get swept away in this notion that the development getting a go-ahead as a whole, means it's a signed, sealed, delivered NHL Arena and NHL hockey team. It's a massive development that ultimately may or may not have an NHL Arena and team attached.

The key to this whole development is clearly more the whole other aspect of:

"Early plans for the rest of the Forsyth County district have called for about 1.6 million square feet of office and retail space, 450 hotel rooms, 2,400 residential units, a 100,000-square-foot community center, a new fire station, and a 1.2-mile connective trail along the Big Creek Greenway."

The Arena sounds like basically a handshake agreement MOU to provide additional funding if they do manage to land an NHL Franchise. But could easily be subbed out for whatever else and the rest of the development isn't contingent on landing an NHL Team.

It's basically the complete opposite of what say...Edmonton did with their new Roger McDavey Arena "Ice District".




While we're putting it out there, can we talk about just how incredibly tacky that looks? Specifically, just plastering a big random image of an electric guitar across the entire side of a tower like that? :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: What even is that? It'd be tacky in Nashville...but at least maybe kinda sorta fit the vibe. In a random Atlanta exurb? lmao.

Also love the artistic vision of whoever put together this rendering, that only Ferraris and Porsches and Exotic Sports Cars will use this random loopy traffic circle thing in front of the rink. And they will drive in very strange patterns, basically just circling around it and maybe crashing up onto the sidewalk sometimes.



But as a serious point to that...i think it illustrates just how much this whole NHL Arena (and the hypothetical team it's contingent upon) are a tacked on side project to the greater density hub development as a whole.




To be fair though, isn't a huge amount of the Port of Houston's traffic basically just oil and oil accessories?

But regardless, Atlanta is very much not on a peer level with NY/Chicago/LA. lol. It's far more on the level of something like Houston. Just different industries and things. Second tier economic centers.



This is also really just more indication that this NHL component of the whole project is...flexible and tentative at this point. The whole project has assuredly run the numbers and is extremely confident in the profitability going forward with just the Community Center/Rink and turn that area slated for an NHL Arena into something else entirely. Heck, it might even be a concert hall of some sort...right next to the ugly ass giant guitar wall thing. :laugh:



The Jaguars to London thing is so much more asinine than the Thrashers to Atlanta again thing.

It's just not remotely feasible. The NFL are plenty content to just continue playing more of these one or two off games in Europe to satisfy that growth. Expanding to adding games in Germany, wherever else they think they can grow the game internationally...without moving a team there. Which would become a complete logistical nightmare.


The Jacksonville thing is basically a crock that is fueled by some weird misconceptions, speculation because the owner happens to be invested in UK Soccer and was at one point going to buy Wembley Stadium, and an agreement that is beneficial to the Jaguars for a completely different reason than it's generally portrayed.

The Jaguars owner and the City of Jacksonville have been moving along steadily with a huge investment in a project to massively develop the area around the existing Stadium. Boatloads of money in "The Shipyards" project. That's unlikely to be a move from a team that's about to move across the Atlantic.

The biggest thing with Jacksonville continuing to roll with their London agreement, is that the owner specifically sees the value in expanding his team's reach to an International Audience. It's sacrificing a couple home games of revenue in one of the smaller NFL markets...while massively expanding the reach and appeal of the brand and team viewership, merchandise sales, etc, to potentially cover the whole of the UK. Not even just in terms of international viewers...setting their games aside puts those two games out of sequence with all the other games on any given Sunday...which is something that the Jaguars have struggled with. As a smaller market and a generally terrible team for most of the last couple decades, they'd be pretty much completely removed from ANY primetime National coverage on Sunday Night Football/Monday Night Football.

It's also become a bit of a competitive advantage for the team on the field. lol. They're a lot more "used to it" than other teams. So it can end up being a bigger home field advantage than actual home field.


If the NFL makes a legitimate move to Europe...it's going to have to come in a big chunk. With an entire division of teams there or something. But in the meantime...they seem happy enough to just rake in a ton of extra revenue out of the project, continue to make inroads in those markets, and having a partner team that's invested in being a component of that a couple times a year just helps move that along smoothly.
Forsyth County Commisoner said on the news the entire development is contingent on getting an NHL team. “All or nothing”. This was when they announced the funding
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Ad

Ad