FCP Bob 1,312 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 You mean you would only watch mcdavid play on tv if he was a leaf? Or would leaf fans watch sabre or coyote games to see him as well? Increasing secondary tv markets? and providing the NHL with viewer metrics in soft markets to try to increase their deal on the next negotiation (in canada) in 10 years? Any incremental increase in Leafs ticket revenue and TV viewership from a team that is championship caliber is going to dwarf the increases for most of the teams that are currently in financial trouble I think. Even if a team like Florida all of a sudden sells out that is less money than increasing Leaf's ticket prices by 20% or adding an extra million viewers to a Leafs playoff game Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 The obvious place for the NHL is Phoenix for McDavid. maybe that was already part of the deal for the new owner who is already bleeding millions in Phoenix Link to post Share on other sites
MapleLeafpoker 1,462 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 Any incremental increase in Leafs ticket revenue and TV viewership from a team that is championship caliber is going to dwarf the increases for most of the teams that are currently in financial trouble I think. Even if a team like Florida all of a sudden sells out that is less money than increasing Leaf's ticket prices by 20% or adding an extra million viewers to a Leafs playoff game agree. I hate when people say MLSE only cares about money, and thats why the Leafs lose. No, the Leafs lose cause MLSE manages them poorly. Even if all they cared about was money, they arent stupid enough to not realize that winning would put $$$$ in their hands like never before. A Leafs team making the Cup finals would be god like in this area, and the ratings (=money) astronomical Link to post Share on other sites
MapleLeafpoker 1,462 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 maybe that was already part of the deal for the new owner who is already bleeding millions in Phoenix this is the only thing that makes me think possible fix. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but I suppose that would be logical. Link to post Share on other sites
serge 904 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 Why cant the actual lottery pick be televised , instead of behind closed doors..Is it because of technical problems that could arise? I mean its not that hard...You get a 100 ping pong balls, put 20 of them with Sabres logos and so on and so on. Link to post Share on other sites
serge 904 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 agree. I hate when people say MLSE only cares about money, and thats why the Leafs lose. No, the Leafs lose cause MLSE manages them poorly. Even if all they cared about was money, they arent stupid enough to not realize that winning would put $$$$ in their hands like never before. A Leafs team making the Cup finals would be god like in this area, and the ratings (=money) astronomical THIS... Clueless people always saying that, they dont care about winning.. Its hard to quantify but a Stanley Cup run would equate to maybe $50 million in extra revenue??? That number might be conservative. Link to post Share on other sites
gruven 530 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 agree. I hate when people say MLSE only cares about money, and thats why the Leafs lose. No, the Leafs lose cause MLSE manages them poorly. Even if all they cared about was money, they arent stupid enough to not realize that winning would put $$$$ in their hands like never before. A Leafs team making the Cup finals would be god like in this area, and the ratings (=money) astronomical I had an interesting conversation with Ken Dryden years ago (when he was leafs prez) about this very topic. His take was really interesting: he said, bottom line, the best thing financially for a team was to make the playoffs every year, go a couple of rounds, then be eliminated. He said that there's a historical downturn after a team wins a championship (financially) because it's a pinnacle. Fans realize innately that you can only go down from the top. He said that the data shows that private box sales, merchandise sales, etc, all drop off after a championship season, and that, since dynasties are almost impossible now, that the best thing to do is be playoff competitive year after year. Like the wings, or perhaps the sharks Link to post Share on other sites
serge 904 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 I had an interesting conversation with Ken Dryden years ago (when he was leafs prez) about this very topic. His take was really interesting: he said, bottom line, the best thing financially for a team was to make the playoffs every year, go a couple of rounds, then be eliminated. He said that there's a historical downturn after a team wins a championship (financially) because it's a pinnacle. Fans realize innately that you can only go down from the top. He said that the data shows that private box sales, merchandise sales, etc, all drop off after a championship season, and that, since dynasties are almost impossible now, that the best thing to do is be playoff competitive year after year. Like the wings, or perhaps the sharks I dont agree..See Boston Red Sox Link to post Share on other sites
MapleLeafpoker 1,462 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 I had an interesting conversation with Ken Dryden years ago (when he was leafs prez) about this very topic. His take was really interesting: he said, bottom line, the best thing financially for a team was to make the playoffs every year, go a couple of rounds, then be eliminated. He said that there's a historical downturn after a team wins a championship (financially) because it's a pinnacle. Fans realize innately that you can only go down from the top. He said that the data shows that private box sales, merchandise sales, etc, all drop off after a championship season, and that, since dynasties are almost impossible now, that the best thing to do is be playoff competitive year after year. Like the wings, or perhaps the sharks Based on the model of keeping the consumer attention on your product, and buying your product, that actually makes sense. Its also like a TV show that peaks once the male and female leads finally get together, and the will they/wont they answer is questioned. (Think Moonlighting for those of us old enough) Once you win, there really isn't anything that keeps the consumer attached to your every game. Not to mention, winning the Cup really hurts your bottom line in terms of renewing contracts. I hate the silliness that because Brian Bickell Blackhawk won a Cup, he should get more than Brian Bickell Maple Leaf who just played for the Leafs. You want to pay Toews more, ok, but the other guys....eh, I dont see it. Hence why moving guys like Versteeg, Bolland was pretty smart of Chicago. Link to post Share on other sites
gruven 530 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 I dont agree..See Boston Red Sox The boston red sox are a hockey dynasty? Link to post Share on other sites
serge 904 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 I loved Moonlighting..Amazing show Link to post Share on other sites
serge 904 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 The boston red sox are a hockey dynasty? No but its a similar analogy Link to post Share on other sites
serge 904 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 Did the Rangers lose revenue after they finally won a cup? I dont think it makes sense for a lot of franchises. The Habs havent won a Cup in 22 years..If they win this year, are they going to lose fans? Link to post Share on other sites
gruven 530 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 No but its a similar analogy No its really not. Compare apples to apples. There's no salary cap in baseball, so dynasties are more achievable. Link to post Share on other sites
MapleLeafpoker 1,462 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 I dont think its an immediate drop year to year, think of it as more of a 5/10 year cycle. at least thats how I see it Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted March 19, 2015 Author Share Posted March 19, 2015 I had an interesting conversation with Ken Dryden years ago (when he was leafs prez) about this very topic. His take was really interesting: he said, bottom line, the best thing financially for a team was to make the playoffs every year, go a couple of rounds, then be eliminated. He said that there's a historical downturn after a team wins a championship (financially) because it's a pinnacle. Fans realize innately that you can only go down from the top. He said that the data shows that private box sales, merchandise sales, etc, all drop off after a championship season, and that, since dynasties are almost impossible now, that the best thing to do is be playoff competitive year after year. Like the wings, or perhaps the sharks Or the Canadian Gothic. Link to post Share on other sites
serge 904 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 The closest thing we have to a dynasty in the NHL right now are the Kings and the Hawks.. I think the Hawks are more popular than ever in Chicago and likewise the Kings. Link to post Share on other sites
gruven 530 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 Did the Rangers lose revenue after they finally won a cup? I dont think it makes sense for a lot of franchises. The Habs havent won a Cup in 22 years..If they win this year, are they going to lose fans? You're really not understanding this: when the Rangers won their cup, the revenues peaks. They sell as many jerseys as they're ever going to sell, everything maxes out. When you can't repeat it (and it's VERY hard in hockey to repeat), there's a fall off. Think of it this way: You're a casual leaf fan. The leafs go on a playoff run for the first time in years. You buy a ticket. But tickets are sold out every night anyway so you're not increasing bottom line. The next year, they get to the second round. You're so excited you buy a jersey. The following year, they win the cup. You're so excited that you buy a leafs recliner. You're not buying another jersey because you already own one.The following year they get knocked out out in the first round. You're not buying anything. Link to post Share on other sites
gruven 530 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 The closest thing we have to a dynasty in the NHL right now are the Kings and the Hawks.. I think the Hawks are more popular than ever in Chicago and likewise the Kings. I dont think its an immediate drop year to year, think of it as more of a 5/10 year cycle. at least thats how I see it Arp gets it. Link to post Share on other sites
serge 904 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 You're really not understanding this: when the Rangers won their cup, the revenues peaks. They sell as many jerseys as they're ever going to sell, everything maxes out. When you can't repeat it (and it's VERY hard in hockey to repeat), there's a fall off. Think of it this way: You're a casual leaf fan. The leafs go on a playoff run for the first time in years. You buy a ticket. But tickets are sold out every night anyway so you're not increasing bottom line. The next year, they get to the second round. You're so excited you buy a jersey. The following year, they win the cup. You're so excited that you buy a leafs recliner. You're not buying another jersey because you already own one.The following year they get knocked out out in the first round. You're not buying anything. I actually do get it...Its relevant in most markets, but not relevant here IMO.. I actually watch and follow the team regardless if they lose every game...Yes its been hard the last 10 games, but I am still watching..I actually bought a jersey for Mateo couple of weeks ago... I am not in the majority I get it, but the Leafs situation is a lot different than most markets..Even Montreal had trouble filling their arena when they were losing... Link to post Share on other sites
gruven 530 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 I actually do get it...Its relevant in most markets, but not relevant here IMO.. I actually watch and follow the team regardless if they lose every game...Yes its been hard the last 10 games, but I am still watching..I actually bought a jersey for Mateo couple of weeks ago... I am not in the majority I get it, but the Leafs situation is a lot different than most markets..Even Montreal had trouble filling their arena when they were losing... Believe me, there have been empty seats the last few weeks at the ACC and you just posted that their were tickets available. Leaf Sports isn't selling any jerseys, while in November they were blowing them off the shelves. Link to post Share on other sites
serge 904 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 Believe me, there have been empty seats the last few weeks at the ACC and you just posted that their were tickets available. Leaf Sports isn't selling any jerseys, while in November they were blowing them off the shelves. Correct however this is an anomaly , even for a losing franchise...I dont recall anything like this in the last 35 years.. I dont disagree with that...I do disagree with if the Leafs were to win the Cup , the revenues will eventually go down because of it...Its a ludicrous notion in THIS market. Link to post Share on other sites
MapleLeafpoker 1,462 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 I actually do get it...Its relevant in most markets, but not relevant here IMO.. I actually watch and follow the team regardless if they lose every game...Yes its been hard the last 10 games, but I am still watching..I actually bought a jersey for Mateo couple of weeks ago... I am not in the majority I get it, but the Leafs situation is a lot different than most markets..Even Montreal had trouble filling their arena when they were losing... I dont know, I think its like that in ANY market, not because of the attitudes of their fans, but because of human nature of the non-fans. Lets face it, people are followers. Too often you seem to put yourself into these examples, its not about you Serge, its about the casual non fan that really isnt that into the Leafs right now. (we all know those kids of people, they only really care when things are really good or really bad, really just when the Leafs are in the news) Those fans will come, and then those fans will leave, once they are no longer super popular. Look at the Raptors last 5 years. They were falling into the abyss of no one caring about them, suddenly last year they start to win, and there are all kinds of people more interested. I was way more into it than I was the year before. So the increase occurs as they start to win and people fill TML square. Once they win, they start to drop off like most pro teams do, and that turns into no longer having this sense of being the coll thing. Link to post Share on other sites
serge 904 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 I dont know, I think its like that in ANY market, not because of the attitudes of their fans, but because of human nature of the non-fans. Lets face it, people are followers. Too often you seem to put yourself into these examples, its not about you Serge, its about the casual non fan that really isnt that into the Leafs right now. (we all know those kids of people, they only really care when things are really good or really bad, really just when the Leafs are in the news) Those fans will come, and then those fans will leave, once they are no longer super popular. Look at the Raptors last 5 years. They were falling into the abyss of no one caring about them, suddenly last year they start to win, and there are all kinds of people more interested. I was way more into it than I was the year before. So the increase occurs as they start to win and people fill TML square. Once they win, they start to drop off like most pro teams do, and that turns into no longer having this sense of being the coll thing. You make good points..But as a Diehard , crazy insane fan..I dont like those casual fans...Its no old adage of hating bandwagon, fairweather fans...The same guy that curses Phaneuf , shouldnt be allowed to enjoy the Leafs Cup as much as me and my peeps. But I totally get it...Even Adrian falls into that category...Before we used to watch the games together and he was all into it..Now he doesnt want to watch anymore..He says "whats the point, they are going to lose anyways" Link to post Share on other sites
serge 904 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 The Raptors analogies with the Leafs have been annoying to me this year...They are mostly jokes, about how the Leafs cant win but the Raps are winning...Even they go as far as comparing effort, defense, scoring etc.. its a stupid analogy.. Sure the Raptors have a following..But it will never reach Leafs status...Like NEVER I try and get into the Raptors..I just dont like it... Its all about Hockey and Baseball for me. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now