Nice troll article. Let's go at one specific paragraph that covers it all:
Quote:
Just think about it. Has the economic picture in Winnipeg and, more importantly, around it, changed that much since the Jets ignominious departure?
|
Yes. Pretty much completely. Within the city it's obvious to anyone who's actually BEEN to the city. "Around it" - the dollar is worth almost twice what it was in 1996. The economy continues to be in the toilet around the continent except for a places like Winnipeg. The NHL has entirely changed their revenue sharing model to account for short-term fluctuations in currency/economy, which is what killed the Jets. If they had another few years, they may well have survived. So yeah, my friend - it's completely changed.
Quote:
NHL hockey no longer depends on gate receipts for its survival.
|
Untrue. The NHL is still one of the most gate-dependent leagues in pro sports. If anything, it's arguably MORE gate-dependent than in the 90s. The massive US TV contract never materialized and by some measures is WORSE than what existed in the 90s (all else being equal). Also you'll note that the teams losing the most money have the worst attendance. QED.
Quote:
And even there, the MTS arena is way too small, so far as the NHL’s newest standards go.
|
Incorrect. And the top brass of the NHL are on record repeatedly saying as much.
Quote:
NHL hockey now depends, just as all other major professional sports leagues do, on television revenue.
|
Really? How much money is the 10,000 or so Phoenix TV audience making the NHL? Seriously, Phoenix attracts fewer TV fans on average than the MTS Centre holds. I'm no television revenue expert, but I'm pretty confident in saying that TV deals do not pay an average of $50-75 per viewer, per game. The Canadian teams would be earning BILLIONS in TV revenue if that was the case.
Quote:
And even while the NHL has been seeking a national TV contract to cover the entire U.S., it has now become an accepted fact of life that most of the money flows in from regional broadcast rights.
|
The national TV contract that after 15+ years has never happened. Oh, again - how's that regional broadcasting revenue going for Phoenix?
Quote:
That would require enormous economic wherewithal not only in Winnipeg, but in the regions surrounding it, also. Even more so, perhaps.
|
I don't even understand this point. People in Winnipeg and surrounding regions, if anything, WILL WATCH FAR MORE TV HOCKEY THAN ELSEWHERE. This may sound like an insult even though it's not, so I hope Winnipeggers understand the reality of where I'm coming from... people in Winnipeg have less to do in the winter than just about anywhere else. If Calgary and Edmonton can attract 200-250,000 viewers per game (it's somewhere around that), I can easily see Winnipeg and its surroundings matching that. Even with a smaller population. Because there's simply less to do on a -30 January evening.
If Winnipeg can match the gate attendance of the bottom 1/3 of the league (trivially easy in MTS Centre), at higher average ticket prices (proven in this country), and garner a comparably huge TV audience - sure, it won't be Toronto or Montreal level profits, but I bet Wpg could be in the top half of league revenues easily.