NHL & Vegas Part Deuces Wild: Betting it all on Black (Knights)

[Killion]

Incentives already? Not a good sign for the drive.

No no, Im ok with it, thats cool dont ya think? Gift with purchase/support. More a "bonus" than
"incentive". If the bonus was insane, something with a high ticket value or whatever than ya.

 

[htpwn]

Incentives already? Not a good sign for the drive.

Based on how fast the ticket drive has cooled off I'm going to go out on a limb and say they don't have enough demand. Even when they hit the goal in a few weeks/months I really think the NHL is going to axe the Vegas idea.

It just looks like a few hardcore fans got rich friends to buy in early and that well has dried up.

I could be wrong but I doubt it.

I cannot see the NHL dropping this. The initial reports of the NHL having interest in a Las Vegas team was in 2005 or 2006 and it may have happened then, if the market didn't crash and burn in 2008, with Vegas being one of the hardest hit markets. For whatever reason, there are clearly an influential cast of owners along with Bettman who are sold on Las Vegas as a market. As long as the arena gets built, and Foley is willing to put down an expansion fee (let alone one as large as has been speculated), this is gonna happen IMO.

In terms of the season ticket drive, the only modern comparable were the ones in Winnipeg and Hamilton and neither can be compared to Vegas. It's too bad Seattle never got to the point of holding a drive in the last couple years because it would have formed the benchmark to how well these drives should do in a non-Canadian market. That said, I think it's gone about how one would expect... northern transplants and minor league hockey fans put down the cash immediately and the rest of the population collectively shrugs their shoulders. And I don't think the NHL cares. As long as the season ticket drive wasn't a colossal failure, which it isn't, they'll 'meet' the goal someway or another IMO, even if it means fudging the numbers. They are still under the impression that plunking down an NHL team will turn a city into a hockey mad market. As we've seen, it's possible to have moderate success (ex. Nashville, Tampa), but it's just as or even more likely that the the whole thing crashes and burns ala Phoenix and Florida.

 

[BattleBorn]

As we've seen, it's possible to have moderate success (ex. Nashville, Tampa), but it's just as or even more likely that the the whole thing crashes and burns ala Phoenix and Florida.

I think a lot of us here are missing the main point of a Vegas team and why it really can't be compared to most any other market so far.

This will be a unique opportunity for the NHL to completely own a decent sized city in the US. The Las Vegas area has two million residents, and while a good portion of us come from other places, we're here now. Phoenix is twice as big with four times as many options for spending your professional sports money. Nashville is a little smaller, with an NFL team in addition to the Preds.

It's overly simplistic, but if we assume every person in every US NHL city has $100/year to spend on attending pro sports and they split it evenly between all the options even without taking into account number of games, avg attendance per game, etc., Las Vegas is by far a better option than any of the moderate success cities just based on lack of other pro sports options. I think this is a good way to demonstrate why Vegas is a good option. Heck, if you start factoring in cost of living, average wages, and disposable income, it looks even better.

Phoenix: 4.3 million people. x $100. 430,000,000
/Four Pro Teams 107,500,000 per team

Atlanta: 6.1 million x $100. 610,000,000
/4 152,500,000 per team

Tampa: 4.3 million x $100 430,000,000
/3 143,000,000 per team

Miami: 5.5 million x 100. 550,000,000
/4 137,000,000 per team

Las Vegas: 2.0 million
/1 200,000,000 per team.

The only one that's close is Columbus (1.9 metro population/1 team), and they fill a 104,000 stadium seven times a year for Ohio State.

This whole (again overly simplistic view) hinges on the NBA not coming along with the NHL, but I sincerely doubt basketball follows within the next decade, giving the hockey team some time to really ingrain itself in the community.

Again, this is a chance for every single sports minded Las Vegan to represent a hockey team versus anything else. It can be just like San Jose, unique in that the city itself is almost defined by it's hockey team. I don't thin that can be overlooked.

ETA: For a few years with the IHL Las Vegas Thunder we were popping 8,000/game with a 1.25 million population.

Our previous mayor was elected on a platform of:
1a. Revitalize Downtown
1b. Bring pro sports.
2. Drink gin.

Once he was term limited out, we elected his wife on almost the same platform.

 

[DyerMaker66*]

So is it "Let's go Black Knights" or "Go Vegas Go"?

 

[Pilky01]

Just my personal opinion but I don't think the ticket drive should be considered a success.

Not that it really matters. I think a decision has already been made. GB wouldn't have give the green light for a ticket drive if this was still up in the air.

Another "weak sister" for the handful of financially successful clubs to support in perpetuity.

 

[LeafShark]

I cannot see the NHL dropping this. The initial reports of the NHL having interest in a Las Vegas team was in 2005 or 2006 and it may have happened then, if the market didn't crash and burn in 2008, with Vegas being one of the hardest hit markets. For whatever reason, there are clearly an influential cast of owners along with Bettman who are sold on Las Vegas as a market. As long as the arena gets built, and Foley is willing to put down an expansion fee (let alone one as large as has been speculated), this is gonna happen IMO.

In terms of the season ticket drive, the only modern comparable were the ones in Winnipeg and Hamilton and neither can be compared to Vegas. It's too bad Seattle never got to the point of holding a drive in the last couple years because it would have formed the benchmark to how well these drives should do in a non-Canadian market. That said, I think it's gone about how one would expect... northern transplants and minor league hockey fans put down the cash immediately and the rest of the population collectively shrugs their shoulders. And I don't think the NHL cares. As long as the season ticket drive wasn't a colossal failure, which it isn't, they'll 'meet' the goal someway or another IMO, even if it means fudging the numbers. They are still under the impression that plunking down an NHL team will turn a city into a hockey mad market. As we've seen, it's possible to have moderate success (ex. Nashville, Tampa), but it's just as or even more likely that the the whole thing crashes and burns ala Phoenix and Florida.

They'll definitely start selling to the casinos to prop up their numbers past 10,000 if sales completely drop off a cliff. They'll get to their magic number one way or another. But the thing is... an announcement of the team being very likely or guaranteed will spur more ticket sales. Do the ends justify the means if they get their sales eventually? If I were a big business or casino that wanted hockey in my town, I'd put down the deposit for every fan needed on my own dime, not even outright buying them for my own sake.

 

[BattleBorn]

So is it "Let's go Black Knights" or "Go Vegas Go"?

Black Knights is likely not the name.

 

[gstommylee]

Just my personal opinion but I don't think the ticket drive should be considered a success.

Not that it really matters. I think a decision has already been made. GB wouldn't have give the green light for a ticket drive if this was still up in the air.

Another "weak sister" for the handful of financially successful clubs to support in perpetuity.

Need to consider what's long term idea for league here. In my opinion it makes no sense short term but long term but long term, Seattle, Portland and Vegas with teams and Coyotes end up relocating to Portland. Vegas would take coyotes spot in that region. So its not really another " weak sister " long term.

 

[htpwn]

I think a lot of us here are missing the main point of a Vegas team and why it really can't be compared to most any other market so far.

This will be a unique opportunity for the NHL to completely own a decent sized city in the US. The Las Vegas area has two million residents, and while a good portion of us come from other places, we're here now. Phoenix is twice as big with four times as many options for spending your professional sports money. Nashville is a little smaller, with an NFL team in addition to the Preds.

It's overly simplistic, but if we assume every person in every US NHL city has $100/year to spend on attending pro sports and they split it evenly between all the options even without taking into account number of games, avg attendance per game, etc., Las Vegas is by far a better option than any of the moderate success cities just based on lack of other pro sports options. I think this is a good way to demonstrate why Vegas is a good option. Heck, if you start factoring in cost of living, average wages, and disposable income, it looks even better.

Phoenix: 4.3 million people. x $100. 430,000,000
/Four Pro Teams 107,500,000 per team

Atlanta: 6.1 million x $100. 610,000,000
/4 152,500,000 per team

Tampa: 4.3 million x $100 430,000,000
/3 143,000,000 per team

Miami: 5.5 million x 100. 550,000,000
/4 137,000,000 per team

Las Vegas: 2.0 million
/1 200,000,000 per team.

The only one that's close is Columbus (1.9 metro population/1 team), and they fill a 104,000 stadium seven times a year for Ohio State.

This whole (again overly simplistic view) hinges on the NBA not coming along with the NHL, but I sincerely doubt basketball follows within the next decade, giving the hockey team some time to really ingrain itself in the community.

Again, this is a chance for every single sports minded Las Vegan to represent a hockey team versus anything else. It can be just like San Jose, unique in that the city itself is almost defined by it's hockey team. I don't thin that can be overlooked.

ETA: For a few years with the IHL Las Vegas Thunder we were popping 8,000/game with a 1.25 million population.

Our previous mayor was elected on a platform of:
1a. Revitalize Downtown
1b. Bring pro sports.
2. Drink gin.

Once he was term limited out, we elected his wife on almost the same platform.

I don't completely disagree. In fact, I think your argument is probably very similar to what is being said in the NHL's boardrooms. Expansion teams in non-traditional markets (Columbus, Carolina, and Nashville are three notables) with no competition did alright, whereas the teams in large markets (Phoenix, Atlanta, Miami) were unable to carve out a piece of the market. But even still, both Nashville and Columbus still had their problems getting going, and they weren't all Jim Balsillie's fault.

Vegas is certainly a unique market, but as I'm sure your aware, with uniqueness comes it's own set of difficulties. I think your probably familiar with the issues of an economy so reliant on tourism, a city a large portion of the population works nights, gambling, etc. From a hockey perspective, the doubts for me are not in the commitment of the minority of local hockey fans, it is whether the majority will follow along. The interest in hockey, at the moment, is not there for the vast majority of Las Vegians and building that base, especially in a city with a lot of transplants, is very difficult.

 

[PCSPounder]

I think a lot of us here are missing the main point of a Vegas team and why it really can't be compared to most any other market so far.

This will be a unique opportunity for the NHL to completely own a decent sized city in the US. The Las Vegas area has two million residents, and while a good portion of us come from other places, we're here now. Phoenix is twice as big with four times as many options for spending your professional sports money. Nashville is a little smaller, with an NFL team in addition to the Preds.

It's overly simplistic, but if we assume every person in every US NHL city has $100/year to spend on attending pro sports and they split it evenly between all the options even without taking into account number of games, avg attendance per game, etc., Las Vegas is by far a better option than any of the moderate success cities just based on lack of other pro sports options. I think this is a good way to demonstrate why Vegas is a good option. Heck, if you start factoring in cost of living, average wages, and disposable income, it looks even better.

Phoenix: 4.3 million people. x $100. 430,000,000
/Four Pro Teams 107,500,000 per team

Atlanta: 6.1 million x $100. 610,000,000
/4 152,500,000 per team

Tampa: 4.3 million x $100 430,000,000
/3 143,000,000 per team

Miami: 5.5 million x 100. 550,000,000
/4 137,000,000 per team

Las Vegas: 2.0 million
/1 200,000,000 per team.

The only one that's close is Columbus (1.9 metro population/1 team), and they fill a 104,000 stadium seven times a year for Ohio State.

This whole (again overly simplistic view) hinges on the NBA not coming along with the NHL, but I sincerely doubt basketball follows within the next decade, giving the hockey team some time to really ingrain itself in the community.

Again, this is a chance for every single sports minded Las Vegan to represent a hockey team versus anything else. It can be just like San Jose, unique in that the city itself is almost defined by it's hockey team. I don't thin that can be overlooked.

(1) I don't think people are missing the point. I think people here want a team in their city and think that it should be a "show of hands contest." The utter FACT that's it's not is immaterial to anyone seeking that elusive team.

(2) Your ratio game is, IMO, GENERALLY spot on. Throw in another factor: it's easier for a city to "service" one team's facility needs than it is four. The ratio works in that direction, too.

Here's the thing: I think this means Portland (obviously my favorite example) is very likely on the outside looking in. I think we're underselling the possibility that big-wigs regard Seattle, when it comes to NBA and NHL, as "first league in wins, second league may not even show up," and the NBA may be trying to lose that race. With Vegas, getting hockey means never having to worry about the NBA, NFL, or MLB. Maybe. Maybe I'm wrong about this paragraph. But I firmly believe that, barring some other change in economic conditions, you'll see less four-sport markets and more one-sport markets over the next 30 years. HOWEVER, if leagues drop some territorial "reservations," you could see more teams in New York and Los Angeles. Sports follow the money even more than they follow the fans.

 

[gstommylee]

(1) I don't think people are missing the point. I think people here want a team in their city and think that it should be a "show of hands contest." The utter FACT that's it's not is immaterial to anyone seeking that elusive team.

(2) Your ratio game is, IMO, GENERALLY spot on. Throw in another factor: it's easier for a city to "service" one team's facility needs than it is four. The ratio works in that direction, too.

Here's the thing: I think this means Portland (obviously my favorite example) is very likely on the outside looking in. I think we're underselling the possibility that big-wigs regard Seattle, when it comes to NBA and NHL, as "first league in wins, second league may not even show up," and the NBA may be trying to lose that race. With Vegas, getting hockey means never having to worry about the NBA, NFL, or MLB. Maybe. Maybe I'm wrong about this paragraph. But I firmly believe that, barring some other change in economic conditions, you'll see less four-sport markets and more one-sport markets over the next 30 years. HOWEVER, if leagues drop some territorial "reservations," you could see more teams in New York and Los Angeles. Sports follow the money even more than they follow the fans.

And that would be bad for the league as you would put too many teams in a single region. I don't see the NHL ever doing that.

 

[Artie Fufkin]

I would think that after building the arena at a cost of what, 400 million. The only way they make even some of their cash back is by getting a team. 7,000 seats is better than no team and an empty arena. Afterall the league will give them rev sharing on top of the cash the team takes in. It appears this drive will be called a success.

The arena will do just fine without a team. From fights to concerts and other special events, the building will generate a ton of revenue. If the building was done now, it would have hosted the Mayweather-Pacquiao fight. That event alone would make almost as much as a whole season of NHL hockey.

No no, Im ok with it, thats cool dont ya think? Gift with purchase/support. More a "bonus" than
"incentive". If the bonus was insane, something with a high ticket value or whatever than ya.

I don't believe in incentives for seat deposits. You should only get a reward when you buy the actual season tickets.

 

[BattleBorn]

I don't believe in incentives for seat deposits. You should only get a reward when you buy the actual season tickets.

The way I understand it, they're not throwing the sweaters out until the team is actually awarded and the deposits are converted to tickets.

1. Deposits
2. Team
3. Convert deposits
4. Get free stuff.
5. Play hockey.

They say it will be a Las Vegas Whatevers jersey, and the Whatevers won't be the Whatevers until there's a team.

 

[BattleBorn]

Vegas is certainly a unique market, but as I'm sure your aware, with uniqueness comes it's own set of difficulties. I think your probably familiar with the issues of an economy so reliant on tourism, a city a large portion of the population works nights, gambling, etc.

The service industry thing gets brought up a lot, and that sector of the economy is the largest in town by far, employment-wise. Last I saw, and I'll research and update this post if I find something different, the service industry employs 268,000 people. Even if we assume every single one of those people works nights/evenings, there's still 1.7 million people in this city that aren't working nights.

Las Vegas is a normal 2 million person city once you get off the Strip and the tourist areas. We still have the normal 9 to 5 type employment it takes to run a 2,000,000 person city once everything is said and done on The Strip.

Not saying it's not something to consider, just that it's not an enormous issue. I've lived here for twenty years and I don't have a single friend that works on the Strip or in the service/entertainment industry.

 

[KevFu]

Can't decide if I should be impressed with 7K over 2 weeks. If the league tried this in Quebec City (where hockey really matters)... my guess is that 15,000 ST would be sold within 72 hours. But I'm sure the NHL knows what they're doing.

I really don't know how true that is. For a REAL TEAM, yes. Absolutely. For a HYPOTHETICAL team?

I think you guys are over-selling people's willingness to let someone else hold their money.

I would think that after building the arena at a cost of what, 400 million. The only way they make even some of their cash back is by getting a team. 7,000 seats is better than no team and an empty arena. Afterall the league will give them rev sharing on top of the cash the team takes in. It appears this drive will be called a success.

The only way to make their cash back?
Yeah, you're right. Las Vegas isn't much of an event or convention town. Who the hell would ever play their building?

 

[Clinton Comets EHL]

I really don't know how true that is. For a REAL TEAM, yes. Absolutely. For a HYPOTHETICAL team?

I think you guys are over-selling people's willingness to let someone else hold their money.




The only way to make their cash back?
Yeah, you're right. Las Vegas isn't much of an event or convention town. Who the hell would ever play their building?

They will never have a team here. Ever.

 

[The Feckless Puck]

...Seattle, Portland and Vegas with teams and Coyotes end up relocating to Portland. Vegas would take coyotes spot in that region.

Interesting theory, but it's not going to happen that way.

 

[gstommylee]

Interesting theory, but it's not going to happen that way.

Its possible it could happen though. Too soon to know if coyotes will remain in Glendale long term or not.

 

[BattleBorn]

I really don't know how true that is. For a REAL TEAM, yes. Absolutely. For a HYPOTHETICAL team?

I think you guys are over-selling people's willingness to let someone else hold their money.

Especially in a city where we already have the Minnesota Vikings, Chicago White Sox, Sacramento Kings, Montreal Expos, Pittsburgh Penguins, and every other team that's ever used the threat of moving here to get a new stadium.

There is a bit of "We're finally getting a team" burnout, and it's a real thing.

 

[madhi19]

Black Knights is likely not the name.

Vegas Alien.

 

[XX]

Another "weak sister" for the handful of financially successful clubs to support in perpetuity.

Almost like they're putting teams where there are new fans to be minted, thus requiring the stronger part of the business (rich teams) to subsidize the overall growth of the league. Imagine that.

 

[Confucius]

The arena will do just fine without a team. From fights to concerts and other special events, the building will generate a ton of revenue. If the building was done now, it would have hosted the Mayweather-Pacquiao fight. That event alone would make almost as much as a whole season of NHL hockey.



I don't believe in incentives for seat deposits. You should only get a reward when you buy the actual season tickets.

so you think hockey attendance will be that bad? I would have thought the 41 home dates would have been equal to 10 fight nights. Does Foley not see this folly.

 

[knorthern knight]

If I were a big business or casino that wanted hockey in my town, I'd put down the deposit for every fan needed on my own dime, not even outright buying them for my own sake.

MGM-AEG might, but would their competitors? Remember, this is an MGM property, probably with some tie-ins to funnel attendees to MGM's casinos after the game.

 

[PCSPounder]

MGM-AEG might, but would their competitors? Remember, this is an MGM property, probably with some tie-ins to funnel attendees to MGM's casinos after the game.

I made mention of how, in a similar situation, Kroger put MLS Columbus over the top. I expected the same for Las Vegas.

If they're being honest about trying to gauge real fan support (and I stop short of taking full faith and credit of their word), you might do that as much for the TV possibility (isolated as that may be) as you do just selling the tickets.

 

[powerstuck]

This morning there is a newspaper report in Le Soleil (in french) that claims Foley will go to the June Governors meeting to ask them to grant him an NHL franchise.

Given what Gary said about how Jets came back working behind closed doors. Given what's been told about Quebecor working on the comeback of the Nordiques ''to shut up and wait''...I would royaly be pissed off if they gave an NHL franchise so quickly and in such circumstances to Las Vegas. I think it would be plenty enough to stop me knowing NHL exists.