Resolute said:
The idea of essentially taking the Jets public was noble, but only underscores that nobody with any financial capacity to own and operate the team stepped up.
Certantly that group tried, and failed miserably as I recall. I still fail to see, however, where the NHL owes Winnipeg anything.
I agree... the NHL doesn't owe anyone anything. If Winnipeg is to get an NHL club once again, they have to prove that they are an economically feasible market.
However, I disagree with your comment that "no one stepped up" to save the team. The Spirit group was NOT a public ownership group - it was a local group of businessmen, who would own the team privately, much like Calgary's present situation. I outlined the reason why they failed to do so in my previous post - they needed to come up with the money to build the new arena (covering the shortfall in government funding), the money to fund the losses for the team for three years while the rink was built, and the purchase price for the team itself. It's also worth noting that Barry Shenkarow jerked them around quite a bit in negotiations, changing the terms of the deal at the last minute and insisting on part-ownership. So, no, the money could not be found locally.
But compare this Burke and Gluckstern, who were essentially handed an arena in Phoenix, and only had to cover losses for one season (the "lame duck" 1995/96 season where no fans showed up because they had announced in the summer of 1995 that the team was moving at season's end). Oh, and they also gave Shenkarow a "consultant's salary" which he continued to recieve until the Ellman/Gretzky group bought the team.
While I'm giving history lessons, it's important to note that Winnipeg's attendance was never the problem - it was the fact that they were unable to generate sufficient revenue at Winnipeg Arena. The city-run Winnipeg Enterprises owned the building, and the Jets were kept from realizing any advertising revenue, and received only a portion of concession and parking revenue. Add to this that the building had virtually no luxury suites (the only "suites" were essentially akin to press boxes), something like 30% of the seats were obstructed-view and the building had very limited access for the handicapped and elderly (end zone seats that went up 50+ rows without a handrail!). It was a building built in the 1950s and then expanded to 15k when they joined the NHL.
Shenkarow's problem dating as far back as 1983 was that he couldn't get enough money out of the building. Attendance was never a problem. Ignoring the afore-mentioned "lame duck" 95/96 season that all the detractors love to point out, the Jets averaged about 13,000 during the 80s and 90s. League average was around 14,500 during that same period, which is not terribly out of line.
I believe that if you consider the changes to the NHL since 1995/96 it
is economically feasible for Winnipeg to support a team in the MTS Centre.
First of all, the building is expandible - there is room for another set of luxury suites opposite the press boxes. This would bring your capacity up to 15,500, with about 100 suites.
Secondly, a lease deal must exist whereby ALL concession and advertising revenue from the building goes to the team. A brand-new, state-of-the art arena provides for much more advertising revenue (a scoreboard that wasn't built in the 1960's, the "power ring" around the upper deck) than existed before, as well as improved concessions, an in-arena restaurant and souvenir store that also never existed previously.
Thirdly, there are television revenue opportunites that didn't exist in 1996. Global TV has grown much larger, and Rogers Sportsnet didn't exist. There are two potential local TV contracts right there. As well, Vancouver and Edmonton have claimed over 30,000 buys for 10-game pay-per-view packages (that's about $4M in gross revenue for those keeping score at home)
It's also worth noting that the Government of Manitoba gives the revenue from all the video lotto terminals in the MTS Centre to the Moose/True North presently. That's another $2.5M that wasn't around in 1996.
Add up the revenue numbers and it CAN work. The REAL question we all need to ask is: does it work better in Winnipeg than Houston, Kansas City or Portland and exactly how many opportunities for expansion/relocation will we see in the coming years?