Why did Quebec not get a team?

[voyageur]

I mean, last season Winnipeg, with the smallest arena in the league, didn't sell out. Unfortunately, Quebec doesn't have the corporate base of other contending marketplaces. It sucks but basically the entire lower bowl of the Penguin games and all of the boxes (obviously) are filled with corporate sheep. The "real fans" were priced out of hockey when the game transitioned from strong niche sport to "big 4" in the late 90's early 2000's. My uncle was paying 20$ a game in 1992 for a level A seat and it was 120$ a ticket in 2000 --- those levels of inflation don't exist (well, they haven't for a while) in the everyday marketplace. (btw, that equivalent ticket is now 300 bucks).

In 1988, my uncle paid 10$ a ticket. Think about THAT. His first season he paid about 800 for tickets and his last season -- just ten years later -- he paid $7,790 ! (95$ a ticket). Btw, a dollar in 1988 was worth 1.38 in 1998 so, if his tickets had merely kept up with inflation, he should have been spending roughly $1,132 for his tickets in 1998. Instead, 1 NHL dollar in 1988 was worth 9.74 NHL dollars in 1998

This is a great post. I can say that I remember taking my younger brother to hockey games in Winnipeg and the upper deck tickets were no more than $30 for a pair.

But you hit a critical point. 1988 there was only 2 players in the league making over a million dollars per year. Gretzky and Lemieux.

Working class, beer drinking, rowdy fans could fill the rinks. Which is why the Nordiques outdrew the Bruins the 80s.

With Bettman the landscape changed. New arenas started popping up, with more luxury suites. Anaheim, San Jose, St. Louis, Boston, Chicago, Philly, Buffalo, Tampa. They became the model for every other team in the league to follow, as a source of greater revenue, and those teams with old character rinks, had to adapt, or relocate (Winnipeg, Minnesota, Hartford, Quebec).

The Canadian dollar was no longer used to pay players in Canada.

And more importantly the big players (owners) in the league started investing in players to win, and salaries skyrocketed, and subsequently ticket prices did too, and they kept rising to a point where blue collar workers were no longer the targeted audience.

 

[Richard]

This is a great post. I can say that I remember taking my younger brother to hockey games in Winnipeg and the upper deck tickets were no more than $30 for a pair.

But you hit a critical point. 1988 there was only 2 players in the league making over a million dollars per year. Gretzky and Lemieux.

Working class, beer drinking, rowdy fans could fill the rinks. Which is why the Nordiques outdrew the Bruins the 80s.

With Bettman the landscape changed. New arenas started popping up, with more luxury suites. Anaheim, San Jose, St. Louis, Boston, Chicago, Philly, Buffalo, Tampa. They became the model for every other team in the league to follow, as a source of greater revenue, and those teams with old character rinks, had to adapt, or relocate (Winnipeg, Minnesota, Hartford, Quebec).

The Canadian dollar was no longer used to pay players in Canada.

And more importantly the big players (owners) in the league started investing in players to win, and salaries skyrocketed, and subsequently ticket prices did too, and they kept rising to a point where blue collar workers were no longer the targeted audience.

Exactly right -- my uncle purchased season tickets after the Penguins signed Mario to a one-year 2M contract. Then kept them when they signed Mario to like a 12M five year deal or something. HUGE money then - nothing now.

From 1988-1994 the average fan was priced out of NHL sporting events.

Baseball and Football have larger seating capacities, but both have run out of "real" fans in the last two decades, I'd argue that the NHL just reached that dubious distinction first.

Unless you have strong corporate support it doesn't matter.

 

[NotAVacuumSalesman]

“Why did Quebec not get a team?”

Montreal is Quebec’s team. Sorry bro

 

[Bradely]

NHL is banking on the Canadien revenu to develop the US sun belt.
If they can reproduce what they did in Florida it can work.....
NHL would never have done what they did in Arizona up north.
All those fans currently saying bla bla bla on Canadian dollar etc...hockey is still currently more popular in Canada than USA... despite 350M population versus 35M. Il might change, probably will change in the futur but not now.!!!

 

[voyageur]

“Why did Quebec not get a team?”

Montreal is Quebec’s team. Sorry bro

That's kind of like saying that L..A is California's team, and there should have never been a team in San Jose or Anaheim. Or the Rangers are New York's team, why go to Buffalo? Or Long Island?

Realistically Hamilton and QC could support teams. Because the market of hockey fans in the region is enough to sustain them.

But we know what the objective is. Daly stated it. 25 U.S teams. 32 team league. vs. 29/30, 29/30, 32/32 and whatever the MLS numbers are (I know Canada has 3 teams). It's marketing.

 

[LiseL]

As someone who lives within 45 mins of Hamilton that would be fantastic. But I would never become a fan of the team, I will still be a Leafs fan. The Sens, Buffalo hell even Montreal whine Leaf fans overtake their arena. Any team in Hamilton will be way way worse. They will struggle to have a legit fanbase for just them without being the second team because southern Ontario. But if the logistics work bring it on. There are thousands of Leafs fans dying for affordable NHL hockey.


Some respectable names with decent careers but no superstars either. The times they are a changin

I don't know about that. Before the Sens came to Ottawa, everyone in my family was a Habs fan. My brother-in-laws family were all Leaf fans. All but one are now Sens fans. Many allegiances will change once you have your own team, especially their children.

 

[Viqsi]

That's kind of like saying that L..A is California's team, and there should have never been a team in San Jose or Anaheim.

Don't be absurd. If you want to bring California into it, then it's more akin to saying Toronto is Canada's team, and there's no reason for any of the others. Quebec might be #2 in population in Canada but wouldn't make the US's top ten.

Y'all are small. Deal with it.

 

[voyageur]

Don't be absurd. If you want to bring California into it, then it's more akin to saying Toronto is Canada's team, and there's no reason for any of the others. Quebec might be #2 in population in Canada but wouldn't make the US's top ten.

Y'all are small. Deal with it.

Just remember where it started, with a team in Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal and Quebec when you are looking up to us, while talking down. Hockey's roots, that have grown to your neighbourhood.

 

[Viqsi]

Just remember where it started, with a team in Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal and Quebec when you are looking up to us, while talking down. Hockey's roots, that have grown to your neighbourhood.

The only thing I have against Canada and Canadian hockey is the number of folks who are snotty and insufferable about hockey in general and who deeply resent the growth of the game that has allowed people like me to appreciate it.

 

[Ianturnedbull]

Why did Quebec not get a team?

They did.

Also this:

Quebec City had a smaller population compared to other cities with NHL teams, which resulted in lower attendance and revenue for the Nordiques. Another contributing factor could be the marketing mismanagement by the team owners, as they failed to effectively promote the team and engage the local community.

 

[dukeofjive]

I wish quebec and hartford gets team again for those sweet sweet jerseys.

 

[voyageur]

The only thing I have against Canada and Canadian hockey is the number of folks who are snotty and insufferable about hockey in general and who deeply resent the growth of the game that has allowed people like me to appreciate it.

From the time it started it had to grow to succeed.

Boston is celebrating their centennial this season. Chicago and Detroit are 2 years away. The Rangers started the year after those 2, and outlasted the Americans, who came from Hamilton via Quebec, 2 years earlier.

There is a distinction between hockey being a fabric of your culture, and hockey being a recreational interest. Some people get it, some people don't. Realistically if there are more hockey fans in Quebec than there are in San Jose or Anaheim, with a greater capacity in their arena, hockey should succeed there. Populations only matter relative to the product being sold. But it's a business more than ever, and the end game is to create new fans, and go with the flow of money.

We live in a disrespectful era, so it's hard to find common ground. But if you like hockey, you're cool with me.

 

[Viqsi]

From the time it started it had to grow to succeed.

Boston is celebrating their centennial this season. Chicago and Detroit are 2 years aways. The Rangers started the next year, and outlasted the Americans, who came from Hamilton via Quebec, 2 years earlier.

There is a distinction between hockey being a fabric of your culture, and hockey being a recreational interest. Some people get it, some people don't. Realistically if there are more hockey fans in Quebec than there are in San Jose or Anaheim, with a greater capacity in their arena, hockey should succeed there. Populations only matter relative to the product being sold. But it's a business more than ever, and the end game is to create new fans, and go with the flow of money.

We live in a disrespectful era, so it's hard to find common ground. But if you like hockey, your cool with me.

I think the populations matter simply because a larger number of people makes it that much easier to have a group for whom hockey is a fabric of their culture. Not everybody here in Columbus is a Buckeyes fan or even cares at all about football, for example, and I know plenty of Canadians who are indifferent or even annoyed when I bring up hockey talk. It's always a subset, and what matters is the size of the subset IMO.

But otherwise, yeah, sure.