Potential Atlanta NHL Expansion Team Thread

[DuklaNation]

How is it bias to present facts? Like this one proving what you just said wrong… The Atlanta United are close to a .500 team at
9-8 yet they have the league’s best attendance (again).
You haven’t provided any other metrics, just the ones you’re getting wrong.

Atlanta United? Hawks? Best? Sold out? Refusing to discuss basic facts about the strong correlation with attendance to team performance is a red flag. I don't know what your base agenda is, nor do I care. My own bias is, I don't want another franchise to be subsidized in a watered down league. There's too much of that already.

This isn't worth discussing at all, because like many online discussions these days, people ignore 80% of the commentary, and just cherry pick their go to talking points. Complete waste of time.

 

[AtlantaWhaler]

Atlanta United? Hawks? Best? Sold out? Refusing to discuss basic facts about the strong correlation with attendance to team performance is a red flag. I don't know what your base agenda is, nor do I care. My own bias is, I don't want another franchise to be subsidized in a watered down league. There's too much of that already.

This isn't worth discussing at all, because like many online discussions these days, people ignore 80% of the commentary, and just cherry pick their go to talking points. Complete waste of time.

I just did bring up performance and attendance. What are you talking about? And you say it isn’t worth discussing yet you keep replying.

Did you have too many mimosas with breakfast this morning?

 

[Voight]

Some people are just dead stuck on the NHL being a gate-only driven league forever.

Unlikely to change anytime soon IMO.

Unless they all of a sudden have a massive surge of interest/popularity, its going to stay a gate driven league.

 

[KevFu]

Yeah, I agree. You just have to have thick skin when you're a fan of certain (potential and existing) teams. And I do understand that not all hockey fans know the history other than Atlanta has had two teams.

Though, I may fly off if I see another "Only a matter of time before QC gets this team" "joke". It has now entered into "Eklund said it, then the opposite will happen" and "Halak, Rider, and a 2nd" territory

Expanding into places like Atlanta, Houston, Salt Lake and San Diego actually DOES help Quebec City get a team back faster.

Without them, Quebec is always going to be in the "why add a passionate, but small fan base when we can potentially bring in new customers?" position. If you want QC back in the NHL (which I do), you should be rooting for a handful of cities like that to WANT expansion teams, with more Western than Eastern wanting in, so Quebec can balance the conferences. And I suspect you want that to happen while Bettman is still in office, so he can restore Quebec as a legacy thing on his way into retirement.

Based on what? I'm a huge hockey fan, went to a ton of games until Spirit Group bought the team. Once it was clear the team was owned by a team that didn't want or care about hockey/Thrashers, I stopped buying tickets.

How about the example of the Islanders. Thrashers were outdrawing them for a number of years. Now they're doing great (attendance). Where did all those new fans come from?

Fans aren't dumb. Islanders fans came out of the woodwork... when the arena deal was announced.

You look around at a bunch of places and attendance CRATERS when there's "bad business headlines." You mention bankruptcy and attendance drops 4000 people a night automatically. I did a chart on the Coyotes and a truly TERRIBLE team in Glendale BEFORE Moyes had 3-5 thousand more fans per night than the Western Conference Finalist team amid all the ownership non-sense.

Pittsburgh cratered amid bankruptcy talk; Dallas did, too. The Sabres dipped when John Rigas was arrested and Empire Sports was caught in the crossfire.

Unlikely to change anytime soon IMO.

Unless they all of a sudden have a massive surge of interest/popularity, its going to stay a gate driven league.

Non-sense. Fans say it's "gate-driven" because it's MORE "gate-driven" than the other big four leagues; but it's less gate-driven than MLS, or anything else. It's really not gate driven.

The average NHL ticket price times average capacity, times 41 games is about $85m in ticket revenue.
The median NHL revenue is $194.5m. So tickets are well less than half.

 

[KevFu]

Can we get a full list of every Big Four relocation and a determination on if the market "failed" or if it was circumstance? Because I think that would be quite telling

 

[AintLifeGrand]

No, MARTA rail goes nowhere near The Battery. I circled on the map where the Braves play. The proposed site of the Gathering is far north of the top edge of the map. It's at least ten miles further up from the current end point of the north "Red" rail line. It would take a decade or more, billions of dollars, and a huge amount of political capital to get MARTA extended that far north. The people that live up there actively *don't* want MARTA, for fear it will only bring crime and undesirable people to their neck of the woods. Read into that what you like (and you wouldn't be wrong).

no one in Atlanta takes Marta - Tried taking to the airport and its a depressing experience.

This is just how it is in Atlanta

 

[AintLifeGrand]

Their attendance tanks when they're not good. Fortunately for them, they've had good rosters most of the time. Ideally, you want franchises that are self sufficient and have fanbases that are solid throughout the ups and downs.

yea like 13 years ago in the midsts of the Great Recesion whike playing in the largest capacity stadium in MLB at the time

 

[AtlantaWhaler]

Expanding into places like Atlanta, Houston, Salt Lake and San Diego actually DOES help Quebec City get a team back faster.

Without them, Quebec is always going to be in the "why add a passionate, but small fan base when we can potentially bring in new customers?" position. If you want QC back in the NHL (which I do), you should be rooting for a handful of cities like that to WANT expansion teams, with more Western than Eastern wanting in, so Quebec can balance the conferences. And I suspect you want that to happen while Bettman is still in office, so he can restore Quebec as a legacy thing on his way into retirement.





Fans aren't dumb. Islanders fans came out of the woodwork... when the arena deal was announced.

You look around at a bunch of places and attendance CRATERS when there's "bad business headlines." You mention bankruptcy and attendance drops 4000 people a night automatically. I did a chart on the Coyotes and a truly TERRIBLE team in Glendale BEFORE Moyes had 3-5 thousand more fans per night than the Western Conference Finalist team amid all the ownership non-sense.

Pittsburgh cratered amid bankruptcy talk; Dallas did, too. The Sabres dipped when John Rigas was arrested and Empire Sports was caught in the crossfire.

QC: Maybe, but if Winnipeg continues to struggle to get the revenue they need (I'm sure they'll be fine), I really think QC will have an even tougher time getting a team just based on market size. That said, if an owner is there, willing to pay the crazy fee and has a NHL arena in good condition ready to go, then they move to the front of the line.

The point about sales is exactly my point.

 

[BMN]

Non-sense. Fans say it's "gate-driven" because it's MORE "gate-driven" than the other big four leagues; but it's less gate-driven than MLS, or anything else. It's really not gate driven. The average NHL ticket price times average capacity, times 41 games is about $85m in ticket revenue. The median NHL revenue is $194.5m. So tickets are well less than half.

This point can't be driven home enough. The "gate driven" narrative is a "by point of comparison" point that doesn't hold up to reasonable scrutiny.

If you want to argue against a NHL team in a non traditional market (not that I'm advocating that you should or shouldn't), your logic is going to be way stronger if you can argue that it doesn't really improve the television prospects of the league to put a team in said market. Just saying "their attendance will be bad!" isn't really acknowledging the whole picture.

I'll repeat it until I'm blue in the face: fan demand in Winnipeg and Quebec City was only part of the picture of their getting NHL teams in 1979. If not for the Molson boycott, it wouldn't have happened. Even then in the late 1970s, there was more than just the gate in play.

 

[DuklaNation]

yea like 13 years ago in the midsts of the Great Recesion whike playing in the largest capacity stadium in MLB at the time

2015-6 was not 13 years ago, attendance dropped 20% due to a worse overall W/L record. Nothing to do with "great recession" as you have termed it.

 

[ponder719]

Can we get a full list of every Big Four relocation and a determination on if the market "failed" or if it was circumstance? Because I think that would be quite telling

I'm not interested in being the decider on whether a market failed or not, but Big Four relocations I can do. I'm starting with arbitrary points where I feel like the leagues seem modern and settled enough, but it'll make enough sense.

Spoiler: MLB

MLB:
1952: Boston Braves to Milwaukee
1953: St. Louis Browns to Baltimore (Orioles)
1954: Philadelphia Athletics to Kansas City
1957: New York Giants to San Francisco; Brooklyn Dodgers to Los Angeles
1960: Washington Senators to Minnesota (Twins)
1965: Milwaukee Braves to Atlanta
1967: Kansas City Athletics to Oakland
1969: Seattle Pilots to Milwaukee (Brewers)
1971: Washington Senators to Texas (Rangers)
2004: Montreal Expos to Washington (Nationals)

Spoiler: NFL

NFL:
1937: Boston to Washington, DC (now Commanders)
1946: Cleveland Rams to Los Angeles
1960: Chicago Cardinals to St. Louis
1961: Los Angeles Chargers (AFL) to San Diego
1963: Dallas Texans (AFL) to Kansas City (Chiefs)
1982: Oakland Raiders to Los Angeles
1984: Baltimore Colts to Indianapolis
1988: St. Louis Cardinals to Phoenix
1995: Los Angeles Rams to St. Louis
1995: Los Angeles Raiders to Oakland (again)
1997: Houston Oilers to Tennessee (now Titans)
2016: St. Louis Rams to Los Angeles (again)
2017: San Diego Chargers to Los Angeles (again)
2020: Oakland Raiders to Las Vegas

Spoiler: NBA

NBA:
1951: Tri-Cities Blackhawks to Milwaukee (Hawks)
1955: Milwaukee Hawks to St. Louis
1957: Fort Wayne Pistons to Detroit
1957: Rochester Royals to Cincinnati
1960: Minneapolis Lakers to Los Angeles
1962: Philadelphia Warriors to San Francisco
1963: Chicago Zephyrs to Baltimore (Bullets)
1963: Syracuse Nationals to Philadelphia (76ers)
1968: St. Louis Hawks to Atlanta
1971: San Diego Rockets to Houston
1972: Cincinnati Royals to Kansas City/Omaha (Kings)
1973: Baltimore Bullets to Washington (now Wizards)
1975: KC/O Kings leave Omaha
1978: Buffalo Braves to San Diego (Clippers)
1979: New Orleans Jazz to Utah
1984: San Diego Clippers to Los Angeles
1985: Kansas City Kings to Sacramento
2001: Vancouver Grizzlies to Memphis
2002: Charlotte Hornets to New Orleans (now Pelicans)
2008: Seattle SuperSonics to Oklahoma City (Thunder)
2012: New Jersey Nets to Brooklyn

Spoiler: NHL

Starting this list with the post-NHA stuff
1920: Quebec Bulldogs to Hamilton (Tigers)
1930: Pittsburgh Pirates to Philadelphia (Quakers)
1934: Ottawa Senators to St. Louis (Eagles)
1976: California Seals to Cleveland (Barons)
1976: Kansas City Scouts to Colorado (Rockies)
1978: Cleveland Barons and Minnesota North Stars to Minnesota (North Stars, yeah, this was weird, and we're not even getting into the North Sharks Expansion Draft)
1980: Atlanta Flames to Calgary
1980: Colorado Rockies to New Jersey (Devils)
1993: Minnesota North Stars to Dallas (Stars)
1995: Quebec Nordiques to Colorado (Avalanche)
1996: Winnipeg Jets to Arizona (Coyotes)
1997: Hartford Whalers to Carolina (Hurricanes)
2011: Atlanta Thrashers to Winnipeg (Jets again)

 

[AtlantaWhaler]

2015-6 was not 13 years ago, attendance dropped 20% due to a worse overall W/L record. Nothing to do with "great recession" as you have termed it.

What about 2006-2009 when they were a crappy team, played in the same stadium, and attendance stayed the same?

Just because you decided to pick a two-year span where attendance fell doesn't make the market not care about the team. As already discussed, a ton of NHL teams struggled with attendance over a number of seasons. Bruins, Hawks, Caps to just name a few. So?

 

[Voight]

Expanding into places like Atlanta, Houston, Salt Lake and San Diego actually DOES help Quebec City get a team back faster.

Without them, Quebec is always going to be in the "why add a passionate, but small fan base when we can potentially bring in new customers?" position. If you want QC back in the NHL (which I do), you should be rooting for a handful of cities like that to WANT expansion teams, with more Western than Eastern wanting in, so Quebec can balance the conferences. And I suspect you want that to happen while Bettman is still in office, so he can restore Quebec as a legacy thing on his way into retirement.





Fans aren't dumb. Islanders fans came out of the woodwork... when the arena deal was announced.

You look around at a bunch of places and attendance CRATERS when there's "bad business headlines." You mention bankruptcy and attendance drops 4000 people a night automatically. I did a chart on the Coyotes and a truly TERRIBLE team in Glendale BEFORE Moyes had 3-5 thousand more fans per night than the Western Conference Finalist team amid all the ownership non-sense.

Pittsburgh cratered amid bankruptcy talk; Dallas did, too. The Sabres dipped when John Rigas was arrested and Empire Sports was caught in the crossfire.



Non-sense. Fans say it's "gate-driven" because it's MORE "gate-driven" than the other big four leagues; but it's less gate-driven than MLS, or anything else. It's really not gate driven.

The average NHL ticket price times average capacity, times 41 games is about $85m in ticket revenue.
The median NHL revenue is $194.5m. So tickets are well less than half.

Even with new, more lucrative television deals with ESPN and Turner Sports, the NHL continues to be a gate-driven league. And missing out on nearly 21 million fans in the regular season isn’t a fun math exercise for NHL owners or players.
For example, the average NHL ticket price during the 2019-20 season was $77.71 across the league. When you multiply that by 21 million, you start to recognize why the NHL is looking at close to $1.6 billion in lost revenue this season from ticket sales.

 

[Tawnos]

@Voight, not for nothing but whatever article you were quoting is misrepresenting their own numbers. That $1.6B represents just 31% of the revenue the league generated in 2018-19. $1.6B in lost revenue on $5.09B. And that was before the new TV deals. It's absolutely a huge hit to take when it isn't there, no denying that, but there's enough money being generated through other revenue streams that gate-driven doesn't accurately describe the league anymore.

 

[TheLegend]

In regards to the NHL being a “gate driven league”…..

Forbes last year put the Coyotes as having a PROFIT for the first time in years…. If ever. Despite the fact attendance was down nearly 3,000 per game compared to the pre-COVID years.

In fact, all 32 NHL teams made a profit that year.

While it’s still a very important piece, it wasn’t the gate that did it.

 

[oknazevad]

Spoiler: NBA

NBA:
1951: Tri-Cities Blackhawks to Milwaukee (Hawks)
1955: Milwaukee Hawks to St. Louis
1957: Fort Wayne Pistons to Detroit
1957: Rochester Royals to Cincinnati
1960: Minneapolis Lakers to Los Angeles
1962: Philadelphia Warriors to San Francisco
1963: Chicago Zephyrs to Baltimore (Bullets)
1963: Syracuse Nationals to Philadelphia (76ers)
1968: St. Louis Hawks to Atlanta
1971: San Diego Rockets to Houston
1972: Cincinnati Royals to Kansas City/Omaha (Kings)
1973: Baltimore Bullets to Washington (now Wizards)
1975: KC/O Kings leave Omaha
1978: Buffalo Braves to San Diego (Clippers)
1979: New Orleans Jazz to Utah
1984: San Diego Clippers to Los Angeles
1985: Kansas City Kings to Sacramento
2001: Vancouver Grizzlies to Memphis
2002: Charlotte Hornets to New Orleans (now Pelicans)
2008: Seattle SuperSonics to Oklahoma City (Thunder)
2012: New Jersey Nets to Brooklyn

Point of order, but listing the Nets going to Brooklyn as a relocation when not listing them going to New Jersey from Long Island in the first place is inconsistent. The Nets didn't relocate in any meaningful sense as they've always been in the NYC metro area.

 

[ponder719]

Point of order, but listing the Nets going to Brooklyn as a relocation when not listing them going to New Jersey from Long Island in the first place is inconsistent. The Nets didn't relocate in any meaningful sense as they've always been in the NYC metro area.

Yeah, Wikipedia missed that one, so I did too. I just transcribed their list, though I did make some choices to leave out things they include like the Raptors and Blue Jays “moving” to the US due to Covid. It’s not as substantive a move as most others on the list, so you can disregard it as you see fit in any case.

 

[tucker3434]

2015-6 was not 13 years ago, attendance dropped 20% due to a worse overall W/L record. Nothing to do with "great recession" as you have termed it.

A. That was before they moved to Suntrust/Truist. When they made that move in 2017, attendance went up >20% despite winning only 4 more games which is a pretty big reason why people think hockey would succeed if given a better location.
B. You start shaving off every franchise that has an attendance dip when on-ice play drops, you’ll be left with an 8 team league. Here are the attendance records from 20 years ago: NHL 2003-04 team attendance at hockeydb.com An awful lot of interesting names in the bottom 1/3.

 

[DuklaNation]

A. That was before they moved to Suntrust/Truist. When they made that move in 2017, attendance went up >20% despite winning only 4 more games which is a pretty big reason why people think hockey would succeed if given a better location.
B. You start shaving off every franchise that has an attendance dip when on-ice play drops, you’ll be left with an 8 team league. Here are the attendance records from 20 years ago: NHL 2003-04 team attendance at hockeydb.com An awful lot of interesting names in the bottom 1/3.

That was a baseball reference. Typically SE football region are fairweather fans in other sports. One of the key reasons hockey failed there before. Also the poor revenue per home game is a major factor. From a business standpoint, the only positive is just advertising coverage in national broadcasts. Other than that, few practical reasons can be considered here.

 

[tucker3434]

That was a baseball reference. Typically SE football region are fairweather fans in other sports. One of the key reasons hockey failed there before. Also the poor revenue per home game is a major factor. From a business standpoint, the only positive is just advertising coverage in national broadcasts. Other than that, few practical reasons can be considered here.

Again, most fans are fair weather fans to an extent. The southeast gets called out specifically because it suits an argument.

From a business perspective, Atlanta is on its way to being one of the top 5 most populated cities in US and Canada. Is the NHL really going to avoid that market because the last team failed under circumstances that would destroy most teams?

 

[KevFu]

The places where fans AREN'T "fair weather" are the places where:

(a) there's just such a massive amount of people that the folks who go to a game or two per season are in massive supply, so when the team sucks they still have good/decent crowds (or people don't stop going out of fear they "lose their place in line" for tickets when the team is good).

(b) "This is what we got, so we go no matter how bad things are" in smaller markets with less sports team options. For example, Buffalo isn't losing fans to a good NBA team, why the Oakland A's definitely were the last decade.

(c) combinations of those factors.


I think a lot of hockey-first Canadian fans don't experience that dynamic because no one has to budget their fan dollars for NBA, NFL or MLB teams in Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg, Ottawa, Montreal.

 

[Takuto Maruki]

I think a lot of hockey-first Canadian fans don't experience that dynamic because no one has to budget their fan dollars for NBA, NFL or MLB teams in Vancouver

Considering there has been a historical groundswell of Vancouver Seahawks fans that has exploded in the years since the Legion of Boom, enough to go down to the games and even buy into season tickets, and enough that the Seahawks themselves are very well aware of their Canadian fanbase, this isn't the best example, but the rest are true.

 

[DuklaNation]

Again, most fans are fair weather fans to an extent. The southeast gets called out specifically because it suits an argument.

From a business perspective, Atlanta is on its way to being one of the top 5 most populated cities in US and Canada. Is the NHL really going to avoid that market because the last team failed under circumstances that would destroy most teams?

Not all markets are equal. I'd prefer a self sufficient franchise. Externally, this just dilutes my personal entertainment factor, so little upside for people outside new markets.

I'd warn that traditional markets are being taken for granted and its slowly starting to show signs of weakening business.

 

[tucker3434]

Not all markets are equal. I'd prefer a self sufficient franchise. Externally, this just dilutes my personal entertainment factor, so little upside for people outside new markets.

I'd warn that traditional markets are being taken for granted and its slowly starting to show signs of weakening business.

From what I understand of revenue sharing, like 2/3 of the teams are on the take, although many don't get very much and would be in the black without it. Traditional markets are included in that. So if you want to get rid of all the freeloaders, you're going to be axing some pretty big teams.

The traditional markets are being taken for granted? I don't even know what you're talking about. Pretty much everyone had a record high in revenue, income and valuation. Big market owners are thrilled right now.

The whole traditional market elitism is what's actually bad business. Markets like Nashville are great for the league (and they were in worse shape than ATL 2.0 there for a while). They're cash positive and open up a new region of TV's. Their existence increases Toronto's bottom line and, more importantly, their valuation. Atlanta is Nashville on steroids.

 

[KevFu]

Considering there has been a historical groundswell of Vancouver Seahawks fans that has exploded in the years since the Legion of Boom, enough to go down to the games and even buy into season tickets, and enough that the Seahawks themselves are very well aware of their Canadian fanbase, this isn't the best example, but the rest are true.

Right, and football is a different animal because it's 8 home games and not 41 to 81

Not all markets are equal. I'd prefer a self sufficient franchise.

By definition, no sports team can be self-sufficient. They need an opponent to play.

The rest of the league is HALF the product being sold. And that's what the revenue sharing is: Their cut for showing up so you can sell a home game.

It's just easier to pool that money and divide it evenly once a year than for each team pay an entire staff in accounting to do the math game-by-game, process all the 1400+ checks or transfers going in and out over the whole league all season long.