|
Post by Guardian on Oct 8, 2011 10:34:01 GMT -6
Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by Douggy-D on Oct 8, 2011 10:42:52 GMT -6
At the Prudential Center, the Devils still don't get huge crowds but I believe the first few years there their gate revenue was $44M, $44M, and $38M. That puts them I believe 10th-15th in the League. I don't know about last year, although it is probably lower. I was at the Prudential Center last year and let me just say that you guys in New Jersey have a damn nice arena i was very impressed. Yeah it is. You should come for the Nov. 5th Jets-Devils game. I'll probably be there.
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on Feb 5, 2012 1:17:57 GMT -6
Gallof: Brooklyn Going After Islanders Hard, Making ‘Aggressive Sales Pitch’ Barclays Center Wants Club To Permanently Relocate From Nassau County NEW YORK (WFAN) — The confirmed preseason NHL game next season at the Barclays Center is part of a larger initiative to get the Islanders and owner Charles Wang to consider permanent relocation to Brooklyn, WFAN.com has learned. The Islanders will host the Devils on Oct. 2, a fact that I first reported two weeks ago and was made official on Thursday. According to sources, including one within the NHL and another with knowledge of the Barclays Center, the venue is making an “aggressive sales pitch.” In addition, the league source said “the chances of the New York Islanders to Brooklyn are actually pretty good.” The preseason game, sources said, is being viewed as a chance for Wang to get a sense of what life would be like in Brooklyn. Barclays Center officials have been using the Islanders as an enticement to lure corporate sponsors, another source said. As for the territorial issue that some media outlets have been citing as an issue for the Islanders, who originally paid the Rangers $4.5 million in 1972 for permission to take root in Nassau County, an NHL source said: “… 99 percent certain the Isles wouldn’t have to pay the Rangers a dime if they moved to Brooklyn or Queens. … There is no fee, but the Rangers wouldn’t be happy about it. But there’s not much they could do.” According to some, there is a 1986 amendment to the 1972 agreement that allows the Islanders to relocate to Queens and Brooklyn. This latest development in the Islanders’ long-discussed but rarely elaborated on plans for the future seems to fly in the face of popular thinking. Wang has lost hundreds of millions of dollars since becoming part-owner of the franchise in 2000. Conventional wisdom has suggested that Wang would look to recoup those losses in any decision involving a new or revamped arena, regardless of its location. However, due to Wang’s silence on the issue since the Nassau County arena referendum failed to pass last August, there’s really no way to know at this point if there has been a shift in his thinking. The Islanders have operated as a small market team over the last few seasons, with their arena issues and red tape playing a major role in their refusal to spend money to hasten the club’s development on the ice. What we’ve seen since has been a methodical and youth-infused rebuilding process that is now in its fourth season and showing some signs of bearing fruit. The NHL and Commissioner Gary Bettman are taking a wait-and-see attitude on the future of the franchise, despite a visit by Barclays’ officials to the NHL offices last year after voters in Nassau shot down the referendum. “I don’t know, and we haven’t focused on this, whether it works for the fan base in Nassau, Suffolk and Queens, because driving to Brooklyn from Nassau and Suffolk is not the easiest thing to do,” Bettman told MSG Network’s Stan Fischler just this past November. So whether the NHL is on board with Brooklyn’s apparent plan remains to be seen. However, it is certainly a better option for the fan base than to lose the team to Quebec or elsewhere when the club’s lease runs out following the 2014-15 season. After what happened in Atlanta with the Thrashers’ move to Winnipeg last summer, Isles fans most likely will agree. Stay tuned. newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/02/03/sources-brooklyn-going-after-islanders-hard-making-aggressive-sales-pitch/
|
|
|
Post by NHLWinnipeg on Feb 5, 2012 1:56:46 GMT -6
this might be the best result for Islanders fans...although the arena can only hold what 14.5K...hey Winnipeg would no longer have the smallest capacity!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 5, 2012 4:15:40 GMT -6
If the Islanders do remain in the surrounding area, Brooklyn would be the best location possible. The reason 1/2 of the fans at Nassau Coliseum are cheering for the Rangers when the two New York teams play is that there is not much of an emotional attachment to suburban Long Island. it would be even worse if the Islanders had moved to Suffolk County.
In Brooklyn, once the fans adopt the team as their own, and the name changes to the "Brooklyn" Islanders (which is inevitable), there will be a real heated rivalry with the Manhatten-based Rangers. Brooklyn born residents have a very strong emotional attachment to their borough.
I would love to see this happen. Besides, I would rather see Quebec land the Coyotes.
|
|
|
Post by Guardian on Feb 5, 2012 11:49:04 GMT -6
I have a feeling that the Winnipeg model of a smaller rink to generate more demand may be adopted by other NHL teams in the near future.
I'm okay with the Islanders moving to Brooklyn and changing the name.
|
|
|
Post by Jetsfan47 on Feb 5, 2012 13:01:39 GMT -6
I think its a good move for the Islanders to make, for islander fans its way better than leaving for another country or state.
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on Feb 6, 2012 1:20:55 GMT -6
this might be the best result for Islanders fans...although the arena can only hold what 14.5K...hey Winnipeg would no longer have the smallest capacity! Supposedly it's 14,500 but really it's unclear for sure. I've heard some people say it could be modified/increased some. And it's still not certain if that 14,500 total is completely unobstructed seats or not. The Barclays people have been extremely tight lipped about the capacity.
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on Feb 6, 2012 1:43:13 GMT -6
I have a feeling that the Winnipeg model of a smaller rink to generate more demand may be adopted by other NHL teams in the near future. I'm okay with the Islanders moving to Brooklyn and changing the name. To an extent it's happened. Tampa chopped off 500 some seats this summer and Florida now covers about 2,200 seats with a tarp. I don't think we will see many 15,000 seat arenas but i wouldn't be surprised to see teams chop off a couple 100 to a 1000 seats here and there. 15,000 would be too extreme for many markets because to have a 15,000 seat arena you have to pay 82 bucks a ticket and i can't see sun belt markets doing that.
|
|
|
Post by NHLWinnipeg on Feb 6, 2012 1:57:30 GMT -6
I have a feeling that the Winnipeg model of a smaller rink to generate more demand may be adopted by other NHL teams in the near future. I'm okay with the Islanders moving to Brooklyn and changing the name. To an extent it's happened. Tampa chopped off 500 some seats this summer and Florida now covers about 2,200 seats with a tarp. I don't think we will see many 15,000 seat arenas but i wouldn't be surprised to see teams chop off a couple 100 to a 1000 seats here and there. 15,000 would be too extreme for many markets because to have a 15,000 seat arena you have to pay 82 bucks a ticket and i can't see sun belt markets doing that. I'm not so sure of that. There are many teams that do not sell 15,000 seats at any price. Selling 15,000 at a league average price of $55 provides about $800,000 per game, which is respectable.
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on Feb 7, 2012 0:38:50 GMT -6
Sun belt fans could very well balk at paying league average and cancel tickets. While the Winnipeg model works great for Winnipeg it very well could fail down south. I can't see Tampa, Florida, Nashville fans paying 55 bucks even with a 15,000 seat arena. Look at the meager gate revenues they brought in last year. You really think they could come close to a Buffalo gate wise? And does 55 dollar ticket prices work in a 15,000 seat arena overall not just gate wise? Gate wise the Jets are suppose to be 13th this year. That's with the 2nd highest price in the league if I'm not mistaken. If ticket prices were 55 bucks where would they be gate wise? Another thing to consider is where are the Jets if you added gate revenue plus concessions together? While I think they are still OK they got to be a few spots lower since 15,004 fans(25th in the league) means less beer/popcorn/programs sold etc. But no big deal since Jets fans pay 82 bucks a ticket. But if Jets fans were paying league average would it work when you added up gate plus concessions?
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Feb 7, 2012 1:03:00 GMT -6
Sun belt fans could very well balk at paying league average and cancel tickets. While the Winnipeg model works great for Winnipeg it very well could fail down south. I can't see Tampa, Florida, Nashville fans paying 55 bucks even with a 15,000 seat arena. Look at the meager gate revenues they brought in last year. You really think they could come close to a Buffalo gate wise? And does 55 dollar ticket prices work in a 15,000 seat arena overall not just gate wise? Gate wise the Jets are suppose to be 13th this year. That's with the 2nd highest price in the league if I'm not mistaken. If ticket prices were 55 bucks where would they be gate wise? Another thing to consider is where are the Jets if you added gate revenue plus concessions together? While I think they are still OK they got to be a few spots lower since 15,004 fans(25th in the league) means less beer/popcorn/programs sold etc. But no big deal since Jets fans pay 82 bucks a ticket. But if Jets fans were paying league average would it work when you added up gate plus concessions? Where I sit (upper deck blue line), I'm standing up every 3 minutes for people getting their $7 beers back to their seats!!! LOL I can't believe how much money we Peggers are spending at the Hangar this year! And on Jets gear (e.g. beer holder hockey gloves - LOL, and jerseys and Tshirts), and the 50-50 draws ($70,000 or more each game). I know this first year is a special case, but wow it's amazing! [head shaking]. I'm not sure if the point was that Jets fans are not spending money on concessions, or whether the point is something else - but Jets fans are definitely spending money on concessions at the MTS parties!
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on Feb 7, 2012 3:26:04 GMT -6
No No No. I'm not saying your not spending any money on concessions or are getting shut out. I know the fans that are at the game are spending on concessions etc... What I'm saying is by having a 15,000 seat arena (not just in Winnipeg but anywhere) your probably not spending as much on concessions as say a team that is averaging lets say 17,000 people but paying a cheaper price for tickets. Or won't be after everyone gets their Jets gear after the 1st year. No big deal because 82 dollar tickets make up for the "lost" 2000 fans beer, programs, popcorn, parking etc. a 17,000 seat arena would have. I didn't mean to imply the Jets are using the wrong business model, that the Jets will fail or anything like that or taking any shot at Winnipeg. I'm just questioning weather you can transfer the Winnipeg model to a sunbelt but replace the 82 buck tickets with 55 buck tickets and make it work for a 15,000 seat arena. What i think is the Winnipeg model is unique but only would work in Winnipeg and maybe for the Islanders at Barclays. I don't think it would work for a sun belt and it wouldn't be appropriate for a bigger Canadian city or for a Chicago, Philly, Rangers or Boston to try.
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Feb 7, 2012 6:49:00 GMT -6
^^^ It's all good! I laughed to myself as I typed my post, at how incredible this first year has been!
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Feb 13, 2012 20:07:56 GMT -6
tvasports.ca/tvasports/hockey/archives/2012/02/20120213-173223.htmlTVA Sports Islanders MOVE TO? On February 13, 2012 at 5:32 p.m. There will be a meeting about the Nassau Veterans Memorial Coliseum on Tuesday at 14h. The topic of the day: the future of the amphitheater of the New York Islanders. Behind the scenes of this meeting - in which there should be no particular progress - the team owner, Charles Wang, would listen to other municipalities that would like to host the Islanders. The news was reported by the "Islanders Point Blank", an independent media that covers the activities of Islanders. Wang's first choice would be to stay in New York, but a source familiar with the matter stipulated that the owner would open his horizons and could proceed with a removal of the concession. "I can not guarantee (that the team does not consider openings to the outside of the metropolitan New York), she said. They evaluate options within and outside the State of New York. It would be misleading to speak as you do in New York. " The sale of the team would not be in the plans of Wang, the Islanders owner for 12 years and is resistant to losses of about $ 200 million. Tuesday's meeting will be led by Denise Ford, Republican Representative of the legislature of Nassau County, Long Island. "The discussion will revolve around the entire property," she said. The Islanders for the home Nassau Veterans Memorial Coliseum since they joined the NHL in 1972.
|
|