Toggle sidebar

Stan Kroenke joins real estate group building NHL/NBA quality arena in San Diego

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
KevFu said:
Ah, I may have misundersood the discussion taking place. I assumed it was about markets and revenue, arguing a market like San Diego vs a smaller one.
Click to expand...

OK I see where you're coming from. "Total revenue" is certainly one metric, but "cheaper to see the game" is a different but completely understandable one.

Like I said - I heard anecdotally people saying it was cheaper to fly to Vegas to see a game then see one in Edmonton. My 2 minutes of research showed it's definitely cheaper to get into Vegas than Edmonton, though I have my doubts about adding the flight (never mind hotel).
 
Yukon Joe said:
OK I see where you're coming from. "Total revenue" is certainly one metric, but "cheaper to see the game" is a different but completely understandable one.

Like I said - I heard anecdotally people saying it was cheaper to fly to Vegas to see a game then see one in Edmonton. My 2 minutes of research showed it's definitely cheaper to get into Vegas than Edmonton, though I have my doubts about adding the flight (never mind hotel).
Click to expand...

Yeah, I thought you guys were talking about how much revenue each team brings in, like "Vegas sells out because they give tickets away" kind of stuff.

Can't imagine why on the BOH forum, I just assumed that's what the convo was!

:sarcasm:
 
I think that San Diego could work. It is 18th largest MSA in America at 3.27mil, just above Denver at an even 3.0 and they are a four sport city. I also see potential for bringing in fans due to the relative sports vacuum created by the NFL leaving.

I guess the biggest question is if you want to go to the 18th largest MSA when you have holes in #5, #6, #10 (Houston, Atlanta, and Phoenix respectively).

I know I know, they just went into Salt Lake which is #46 on this list (😳) but that was more of an emergency relocation with a willing ownership group and strong municipal backing. Basically everything went right for SLC but the NHL didn't really "want" SLC; they wanted rid of a problem.

With only so many potential expansion teams left to go around, the NHL can't waste any more slots you know? I suppose you could go into all four of the above mentioned markets and move a Nashville over into the eastern conference. I just think San Diego is more on the "everything has to fall into place for us to get one" side of the equation rather than the "NHL wants to go there" side. San Diego needs their Ryan Smith basically. Is Stan Kroenke that guy? I don't really understand why he has his paw prints all over this project when he already owns an NHL franchise.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Bostonzamboni and rsteen
Headshot77 said:
I think that San Diego could work. It is 18th largest MSA in America at 3.27mil, just above Denver at an even 3.0 and they are a four sport city. I also see potential for bringing in fans due to the relative sports vacuum created by the NFL leaving.

I guess the biggest question is if you want to go to the 18th largest MSA when you have holes in #5, #6, #10 (Houston, Atlanta, and Phoenix respectively).
Click to expand...

I think San Diego is definitely a place the NHL should target, because while you mention three cities with more people... those other markets have NFL and NBA and San Diego does not.

It's the fourth-largest market without an NHL team.
It's the fourth-largest market without an NBA team.
It's the fourth-largest market without an NFL team.


Think of it from the perspective of "fan dollars per person needed to provide league average revenue for all the market's big five teams." That's obviously not how it really works, but it shows you the likelihood of one team being financially successful.

For example, NY and LA have so many people that it's like $60-$75 per person to reach the average revenue to have ONE NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL and MLS team in those cities. For the 11 New York has, it's $146 per person.

So to add an NHL team would be:
$210 - Houston
$221 - Atlanta
$226 - Quebec
$293 - Phoenix

$187 - San Diego


(Again, this isn't like "how it works" because corporate dollars are a massive factor, which is why everyone's gung-ho on Vegas, which is $323 per person for NFL and NHL now, and would be $643 if they get an MLB and NBA team.)

But it does illustrate how the market saturation for sports dollars is real.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bucky_Hoyt
KevFu said:
I think San Diego is definitely a place the NHL should target, because while you mention three cities with more people... those other markets have NFL and NBA and San Diego does not.

It's the fourth-largest market without an NHL team.
It's the fourth-largest market without an NBA team.
It's the fourth-largest market without an NFL team.


Think of it from the perspective of "fan dollars per person needed to provide league average revenue for all the market's big five teams." That's obviously not how it really works, but it shows you the likelihood of one team being financially successful.

For example, NY and LA have so many people that it's like $60-$75 per person to reach the average revenue to have ONE NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL and MLS team in those cities. For the 11 New York has, it's $146 per person.

So to add an NHL team would be:
$210 - Houston
$221 - Atlanta
$226 - Quebec
$293 - Phoenix

$187 - San Diego


(Again, this isn't like "how it works" because corporate dollars are a massive factor, which is why everyone's gung-ho on Vegas, which is $323 per person for NFL and NHL now, and would be $643 if they get an MLB and NBA team.)

But it does illustrate how the market saturation for sports dollars is real.
Click to expand...
I definitely don't disagree with this assessment. Like I said San Diego has a sports vacuum with the Chargers leaving. Their MLB team had some amazing growth once they became the only game in town. There's definitely room for one more sports franchise down there and there's no reason it can't be hockey.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bostonzamboni
Headshot77 said:
I definitely don't disagree with this assessment. Like I said San Diego has a sports vacuum with the Chargers leaving. Their MLB team had some amazing growth once they became the only game in town. There's definitely room for one more sports franchise down there and there's no reason it can't be hockey.
Click to expand...
They have mls coming in next year
 
  • Like
Reactions: Voight and Bostonzamboni
joelef said:
They have mls coming in next year
Click to expand...
MLS is not major league. Every other NHL, MLB, and NFL are the top leagues in the world in their respective sport. MLS isn't even one of the top 5 leagues in its sport.
 
aqib said:
MLS is not major league. Every other NHL, MLB, and NFL are the top leagues in the world in their respective sport. MLS isn't even one of the top 5 leagues in its sport.
Click to expand...
But I bet the two Los Angeles MLS soccer teams are as popular if not more so in the Los Angeles market in just their short history vs. the Kings and Ducks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Voight and Bucky_Hoyt
Bostonzamboni said:
But I bet the two Los Angeles MLS soccer teams are as popular if not more so in the Los Angeles market in just their short history vs. the Kings and Ducks.
Click to expand...

To be fair, and I know Apple/MLS Season Pass streaming exists but that doesn't excuse these numbers in any way.

LAFC, two Saturday's ago got 196k avg viewership on FOX. On FOX! A Big 4 network, and a live U.S. based sporting event got 196k. I know you know how bad, beyond bad that is.

Not to be outdone, Los Angeles Galaxy got a combined 60k Sunday on FS1 & Fox Deportes. 60k, for a live sporting event on cable. FWIW Bassmaster at 5amPT got 103k on FS1, same day same channel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bostonzamboni
aqib said:
MLS is not major league. Every other NHL, MLB, and NFL are the top leagues in the world in their respective sport. MLS isn't even one of the top 5 leagues in its sport.
Click to expand...
It may not be up there with EPL, Serie-A etc. but it is climbing and it's the only top-of-pyramid football/soccer league the US and Canada is going to get. Franchises are going for half a billion now. That was the going rate for an NHL team a decade ago.
 
KevFu said:
And there's only three markets larger than SD that don't have MLS.

Montreal, Orlando and San Diego are the only Top 20 markets that don't have at least four of the big five. But Orlando's suburbs are only like 50 miles from Tampa's suburbs and they have a combined six teams in the five sports (2 MLS).
Click to expand...
Tampa doesn't have an MLS team. There is talk as a 'hopeful' but nothing official.
 
Bucky_Hoyt said:
It may not be up there with EPL, Serie-A etc. but it is climbing and it's the only top-of-pyramid football/soccer league the US and Canada is going to get. Franchises are going for half a billion now. That was the going rate for an NHL team a decade ago.
Click to expand...

The main thing as it pertains to the discussion is the revenue. Where MLS stands in the landscape of world soccer leagues doesn't really matter when we're talking about the saturation of the market for fan dollars.

The average MLS team brings in $75 million in revenue. So while it's a "minor league" in the world soccer landscape, it's a Major League in terms of "significant amount of money the same fans are providing."

Because a "minor league team" brings in about $10m in revenue on average.

I've seen people pointing out in threads on BOH than an NHL owner losing $40-$60 million is extremely bad. So maybe we should consider the $40-$60m difference in market saturation that MLS teams account for.
 
Melrose Munch said:
Be honest,

Would people rather have Phoenix or San Diego as a market?
Click to expand...

I'd answer San Diego, but with the caveat that the reason it's San Diego is solely because Phoenix has NFL, MLB and NBA competing for sports dollars; while San Diego has MLB and MLS.

San Diego leads MLB in attendance. San Diego went from "Small market baseball club" to "Spending more than the Yankees" when the Chargers left town. Their sponsorship dollars soared; their ticket revenue soared (they jacked up their prices for both). Because everyone giving money to the Chargers gave it to the Padres when the NFL left!


It's not a value judgement of "San Diego" vs "Phoenix." It's merely a value judgement of market saturation.

The opposite is true for Milwaukee. No one is clamoring for the NHL in Milwaukee. They're really small to be a four-sport city. But if the Bucks and Brewers moved tomorrow, the NHL filling that void makes a ton of sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheLegend, Headshot77 and Melrose Munch
Bucky_Hoyt said:
Personally, I think SD could land an NHL team if they get this building to properly incorporate hockey into the design. I'm thinking relo over expansion but I'm no oracle. Phoenix... Eh... not so much.
Click to expand...
Relocation from where?
 
Bucky_Hoyt said:
Personally, I think SD could land an NHL team if they get this building to properly incorporate hockey into the design. I'm thinking relo over expansion but I'm no oracle. Phoenix... Eh... not so much.
Click to expand...

It's going to be a hockey arena. It's replacing the arena the San Diego Gulls play in, they'd be the primary tenant if there's no NHL/NBA team.
 
  • Love
Reactions: CHRDANHUTCH
Bucky_Hoyt said:
If SD can get their ducks in a row, anything's possible ;-)
Click to expand...
If this is some sort of idea that Anaheim would relocate to San Diego for some reason, that shows extremely poor (to no) understanding of the current situation in Anaheim.
 
I really think the future is 36 teams with the four below coming in:
arz
houston
atlanta
san diego

QC is always going to be an emergency relocation site. I hate it, I miss the nordiques, but that is the reality in 2024. Other locations with interest are really just going to be there for emergency backup.

The one major X factor is IF Ontario gets a 2.0. It can be argued both ways but I think it is foolish to dismiss that as a real possibility.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JKG33
bleedblue94 said:
I really think the future is 36 teams with the four below coming in:
arz
houston
atlanta
san diego

QC is always going to be an emergency relocation site. I hate it, I miss the nordiques, but that is the reality in 2024. Other locations with interest are really just going to be there for emergency backup.

The one major X factor is IF Ontario gets a 2.0. It can be argued both ways but I think it is foolish to dismiss that as a real possibility.
Click to expand...

I could see that, but we all know there's like one step for Arizona and Atlanta (arena deals done) and one step for Houston (Feritta pulling the trigger) and one step for Quebec (PKP adding a partner so there's enough money to buy the team).

San Diego and almost anyone else we can think of have 2 steps or 3 steps. San Diego is trying to build an arena, but not trying to own a team, because the Kroenkes already have one. They need an arena AND an owner. (Or an arena AND a buyer for the Avalanche, but that seems unlikely).
 
  • Like
Reactions: CHRDANHUTCH
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom