• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

MacK_Attack

Quebec City getting new arena

Rate this topic

126 posts in this topic

Quebec City is on the verge of being one step closer to adding and NHL team.

QMI Agency is reporting that Quebec Premier Jean Charest will meet with Quebec City mayor Regis Labeaume next Tuesday to talk about the financing for a new arena.

The report states that Charest will then announce that the province will put up $400 million to help pay for the facility.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2010/09/05/report_quebec/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see how it benefits a place like Québec City to go into debt to build a new arena when they've already got one. Yeah, it's old, but they could update it like the Oilers have (as someone mentioned in the comments). It's not like they need to try extra hard to lure the people there into going to games with the bait of a state-of-the-art facility; I'd imagine that the rabid, hockey-starved fanbase would show up come hell or high water at this point. And hey, if they really want a new one, why not just hang out at the old one for a few years, keep costs down, and then build a new one with money in hand?

And why the heck does the League care either way as long as it meets minimal standards? Do they profit from this in some way I don't understand? And why is QC so eager to do this when Bettman has been yanking around Winnipeg, who has already built a new, NHL-spec arena, for a while now?

As for an actual opinion, I'd love to see QC and Winnipeg both get new teams, especially since Winny has already built an arena and QC is going to; I'd hate to see them go through all the trouble and then have Bettman thumb his nose at them. Winnipeg Coyotes and Québec City Thrashers FTW! :sly:

Edited by MulesWillFly93
zata40 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm curious, being that both Quebec and Winnipeg just recently had teams leave because of financial issues, why do people want teams there again? It's been proven that they can't support NHL teams. Unless I'm missing something, I just don't get it. It's like saying we should elect Bush again.

The teams left there for a reason, there is no reason to put them back where they failed already. I'd rather see a team in Seattle or Kansas.

Edited by Z and D for the C
F2B&G and wings1110 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm curious, being that both Quebec and Winnipeg just recently had teams leave because of financial issues, why do people want teams there again? It's been proven that they can't support NHL teams. Unless I'm missing something, I just don't get it. It's like saying we should elect Bush again.

The teams left there for a reason, there is no reason to put them back where they failed already. I'd rather see a team in Seattle or Kansas.

The biggest difference between now and then is that the Canadian dollar is back on par, as opposed to being 65 cents or whatever back when they had to move. A team in Quebec City would be a very low risk move, certainly much less so than Kansas. I fully expect the NHL to expand to 32 teams within the decade adding good markets like Quebec and shifting around some other one(s) if they don't work out (Atlanta seems like the best candidate at the moment). FTR I like Seattle as a home for a team one day.

Edited by T-Ruff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see how it benefits a place like Québec City to go into debt to build a new arena when they've already got one. Yeah, it's old, but they could update it like the Oilers have (as someone mentioned in the comments). It's not like they need to try extra hard to lure the people there into going to games with the bait of a state-of-the-art facility; I'd imagine that the rabid, hockey-starved fanbase would show up come hell or high water at this point. And hey, if they really want a new one, why not just hang out at the old one for a few years, keep costs down, and then build a new one with money in hand?

And why the heck does the League care either way as long as it meets minimal standards? Do they profit from this in some way I don't understand? And why is QC so eager to do this when Bettman has been yanking around Winnipeg, who has already built a new, NHL-spec arena, for a while now?

As for an actual opinion, I'd love to see QC and Winnipeg both get new teams, especially since Winny has already built an arena and QC is going to; I'd hate to see them go through all the trouble and then have Bettman thumb his nose at them. Winnipeg Coyotes and Québec City Thrashers FTW! :sly:

Having a shiny new toy always catches the eyes of Bettman, and his minions (the BOG).

I'm curious, being that both Quebec and Winnipeg just recently had teams leave because of financial issues, why do people want teams there again? It's been proven that they can't support NHL teams. Unless I'm missing something, I just don't get it. It's like saying we should elect Bush again.

The teams left there for a reason, there is no reason to put them back where they failed already. I'd rather see a team in Seattle or Kansas.

Atlanta had a team back in the early 1980's, ditto for Colorado, and so did the Bay area in California, but that didn't stop the league from going back there now did it?

It's not like the locals didn't support the teams; these 2 clubs in Winnipeg, and Quebec City were financially at a disadvantage due to the dollar difference, and being smaller markets didn't help either.

Now I won't say that these 2 potential re-location canidates will never have future financial woes, but looking at Phoenix, Nashville, Atlanta, Florida, and even the NYI - I dunno if they'd do any worse...Keep the league at 30 teams - re-location is the key.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I won't say that these 2 potential re-location canidates will never have future financial woes, but looking at Phoenix, Nashville, Atlanta, Florida, and even the NYI - I dunno if they'd do any worse...Keep the league at 30 teams - re-location is the key.

Unfortunately, if the league adds new cities, it will probably be expansion teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm curious, being that both Quebec and Winnipeg just recently had teams leave because of financial issues, why do people want teams there again? It's been proven that they can't support NHL teams. Unless I'm missing something, I just don't get it. It's like saying we should elect Bush again.

The teams left there for a reason, there is no reason to put them back where they failed already. I'd rather see a team in Seattle or Kansas.

The reason they left was not primarily financial reasons either. Where in the US, the State could fund new arenas, Canada's Federal Government refuses funding for arenas.

The old Winnipeg and Quebec stadiums closed because they needed a new arena, and were unable to build one.

In fact, I seem to remember seeing a report somewhere, that the Nordiques had the second highest attendance average in the league up until they were sent packing. I don't believe that either of the teams were financial drains like the Coyotes, Thrashers, Panthers and Nashville.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as long as the league doesnt add any NEW teams im happy if u wanna move franchises fine but 30 teams should be the limit

also....how the f*** are these citys getting financing when they dont even have a team and they may not get one, yet detroit cant get financing and we have the most successful team in hockey?

Edited by wings1110

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm curious, being that both Quebec and Winnipeg just recently had teams leave because of financial issues, why do people want teams there again? It's been proven that they can't support NHL teams. Unless I'm missing something, I just don't get it. It's like saying we should elect Bush again.

The teams left there for a reason, there is no reason to put them back where they failed already. I'd rather see a team in Seattle or Kansas.

It wasn't really financial trouble perse.....

It was back in the free trade era, when they'd have to offer a player 13-14 million in order to compete with a team like the wings that only hade to pay 10 million. (or 7 million to match a 5 million offer) Now, with the Cap, that shouldn't be an issue anymore.

Also, It was Back in an era where the owner of the team was the owner of the team, and could up and move his team if he wished. Minnesota had great attendance and is right up there as the most rabid hockey City in America. It's not that they couldn't support the team, it's that Ted Green figured he could get Better TV money in a bigger market like Dallas, and Bigger corporate sponsorship. Back then, an owner could move his team, if he thought there'd be more money elsewhere. That's what happened in Hartford, Winnipeg and Quebec City. It was the individual owners who could decide to sell or move as they wished.

I hate Bettman, and I'm convinced Bettman hates Canada. To his credit, Gary Bettman saw this as a problem, and in order to protect the remaining franchises like Pittsburgh, Ottawa, Buffalo, Calgary and Edmonton, He changed the process, to where a move would have to be approved by the league and Owners. As much as I would have liked to see Phoenix move up to Hamilton, it just doesn't work that way anymore. It's Bettman's new rules that prevent a private sale and relocation of a franchise, the way it happened in the Former NHL cities. Sure, all those teams relocated under Bettman's watch, but he did something to stop it from happening more. And he IS doing what he can to keep franchises where they are. Good move, Good Idea, about 15 years too late. Hopefully they can only take so much of the bleeding in the non Hockey markets and get the NHL back to where it should be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

QC and Winnipeg can have all the nice arenas private funding can by. But without a corporate partner and fat television revenues guaranteed, it's not going to happen. Bettman isn't going out of his way to make it happen either. Even though ticket sales are poor in Phoenix, Nashville, Atlanta, and Columbus, they have good tv contracts, and solid corporate partnerships.

Edited by miller76

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

40% of money that NHL made (last 2-3 seasons) are coming from Canadian teams...

There are 50 000 of Quebec Nordiques fans (according to http://www.nordiquesnation.com/) and Phoenix has something like 200, Islanders 220...

Relocation is fine - NO TO EXPANSION

QC and Winnipeg can have all the nice arenas private funding can by. But without a corporate partner and fat television revenues guaranteed, it's not going to happen. Bettman isn't going out of his way to make it happen either. Even though ticket sales are poor in Phoenix, Nashville, Atlanta, and Columbus, they have good tv contracts, and solid corporate partnerships.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Karl_P%C3%A9ladeau

He's very interested in Nordiques...

That's what I told you couple of weeks ago.

They've already poked around the Federal government regarding funding for a new arena and were told no.

False, Stockwell Day said no regarding funding for a NHL TEAM not a new arena. Josée Verner said that they are going to put money on a new arena.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/09/02/stephen-harper-quebec-nordiques-fan/

wings1110 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

QC and Winnipeg can have all the nice arenas private funding can by. But without a corporate partner and fat television revenues guaranteed, it's not going to happen. Bettman isn't going out of his way to make it happen either. Even though ticket sales are poor in Phoenix, Nashville, Atlanta, and Columbus, they have good tv contracts, and solid corporate partnerships.

Um, David Thomson is co-owner of the largest media conglomerate in Canada, which includes TSN. The rumored ownership group for a potential QC team would be headed by Quebecor, which is also a huge media corporation in Quebec and is in the process of expanding west. These people OWN the networks the tv contracts are signed to in the first place. Corporate partnerships for the MTS already have a huge waiting list, and partners waiting in line is only going to increase as the city's inland port project develops.

I'm curious, being that both Quebec and Winnipeg just recently had teams leave because of financial issues, why do people want teams there again? It's been proven that they can't support NHL teams. Unless I'm missing something, I just don't get it. It's like saying we should elect Bush again.

I'm not sure I'd call 15+ years 'just recently'. The NHL and the North American economy in general has changed dramatically in that time, largely in favour of reestablishment of Canadian teams. Plus there's plenty of precedent for the reestablishment of teams in markets that have supposedly been 'proven' to be unsuitable.

Edited by _Kabrok_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

False, Stockwell Day said no regarding funding for a NHL TEAM not a new arena. Josée Verner said that they are going to put money on a new arena.

False; from Montreal Gazette :

Quebec City shouldn't look to a deficit-fighting federal government to help fund a new arena that would enable it to lure back a National Hockey League franchise, Treasury Board President Stockwell Day said yesterday.

...

The only way the federal government would provide funding to Quebec City would be with regards to a bid on the Winter Olympic Games. That would be on the entire package and not just a new arena. That would also be a long time from now, long after the proposed return of the NHL to Quebec City for the third time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quebec City's metro population ( 715,515 or 725,000 depending on your source) has about 300,000 less people than Edmonton (the current smallest NHL market).

How much smaller/cheaper than Edmonton (a Canadian team) can we make it and have it still work? and why would the NHL want to?

miller76 and F2B&G like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

False; from Montreal Gazette :

The only way the federal government would provide funding to Quebec City would be with regards to a bid on the Winter Olympic Games. That would be on the entire package and not just a new arena. That would also be a long time from now, long after the proposed return of the NHL to Quebec City for the third time.

That's exatcly what I've said!

EDIT: Why negative "feedback"???

Edited by Dominator2005

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quebec City's metro population ( 715,515 or 725,000 depending on your source) has about 300,000 less people than Edmonton (the current smallest NHL market).

How much smaller/cheaper than Edmonton (a Canadian team) can we make it and have it still work? and why would the NHL want to?

NHL welcome to Mexico City (that was same logic used by Bettman when he decided to expend NHL).

Quebec Remparts (QMJHL) average attendance is 12 088 (fans) which is very good when you compare with the quality of the league.

http://www.lhjmq.qc.ca/lang_fr/index.php?page=11194745&typ=reg&an=0910&v=v2&report=TeamsAttendenciesByTeam&filter_id=Que&subfilter_id=

F.Michael likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quebec City's metro population ( 715,515 or 725,000 depending on your source) has about 300,000 less people than Edmonton (the current smallest NHL market).

How much smaller/cheaper than Edmonton (a Canadian team) can we make it and have it still work? and why would the NHL want to?

The NHL has faired far worse in much larger cities on this side of the border, and like others have already said - a significant portion of the league's revenue comes outta Canada.

With the cap in place, a solid fan base, and "good/smart" owners/mgt - there's no reason why a city like Winnipeg, or Quebec City cannot ice a competitive, and financially viable team.

They really couldn't do worse than what we already have in Phoenix/Nashville/Atlanta/etc/etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

QC and Winnipeg can have all the nice arenas private funding can by. But without a corporate partner and fat television revenues guaranteed, it's not going to happen. Bettman isn't going out of his way to make it happen either. Even though ticket sales are poor in Phoenix, Nashville, Atlanta, and Columbus, they have good tv contracts, and solid corporate partnerships.

Dunno if I'd call NBC/VS/local FOX cable a "fat tv contract", but then again my definition may be different than yours.

Last I've heard there have been some legit business partners looking into bringing back teams to Winnipeg/Quebec City.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any team in Quebec City would get a piece of the Hockey Night in Canada pie, which is no small chunk of change.

Quebec City's metro population ( 715,515 or 725,000 depending on your source) has about 300,000 less people than Edmonton (the current smallest NHL market).

How much smaller/cheaper than Edmonton (a Canadian team) can we make it and have it still work? and why would the NHL want to?

I don't think Edmonton is all that cheap, they just can't get the players to spend money on. Darryl Katz certainly has the pockets to spend what he wants, just that they can't get the players.

And that's a certainly a concern for Quebec City. While Montreal is a city you can get by in without speaking French, you can't in Quebec City. It isn't anywhere close to as bilingual as Montreal. Although, European players may like it there, the language barrier could be a problem in terms of recruiting Anglophone players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...Darryl Katz...

One of my favourite "under the radar" rumours of this summer was this; from Edmonton Journal :

Edmonton Oilers owner Daryl Katz's Rexall Sports Corp. may be looking to take control of the lease of Hamilton's Copps Coliseum, according to Sportsnet. ca.

In an unsourced report on its web-site, Sportsnet. ca speculates the motivation for such a move would be to "control the potential arrival of a relocated or expansion NHL team."

...

There was another story with him assuming the lease for the new stadium to be used for the upcoming Pan-Am Games in Hamilton. And this all coming at a time where he is looking for a new arena for the Oilers from the city of Edmonton.

It isn't anywhere close to as bilingual as Montreal.

Example: the online petition for a new team in Quebec City.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having a shiny new toy always catches the eyes of Bettman, and his minions (the BOG).

Atlanta had a team back in the early 1980's, ditto for Colorado, and so did the Bay area in California, but that didn't stop the league from going back there now did it?

It's not like the locals didn't support the teams; these 2 clubs in Winnipeg, and Quebec City were financially at a disadvantage due to the dollar difference, and being smaller markets didn't help either.

Now I won't say that these 2 potential re-location canidates will never have future financial woes, but looking at Phoenix, Nashville, Atlanta, Florida, and even the NYI - I dunno if they'd do any worse...Keep the league at 30 teams - re-location is the key.

Phoenix has better attendance history than either of Winnipeg or Quebec, FTR. Learn your history. The Jets and Nordiques didn't move because of the Canadian dollar. That's a LIE and a MYTH. They moved because the teams didn't have enough fan support. Certainly, a better dollar would have helped, but the teams would still have been sold and moved eventually.

F2B&G likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Phoenix has better attendance history than either of Winnipeg or Quebec, FTR. Learn your history. The Jets and Nordiques didn't move because of the Canadian dollar. That's a LIE and a MYTH. They moved because the teams didn't have enough fan support. Certainly, a better dollar would have helped, but the teams would still have been sold and moved eventually.

Both teams (Winnipeg, and Quebec) sold/moved because neither city would commit the tax payer $$$ the previous owners wanted in order to build new arenas in order to keep up "with the Jones next door" in a league that back then mid 1990's had no salary cap, and player salaries continued to rise.

Fan support was never a major issue with either club, and most likely it wouldn't be today...Neither club has seen the financial mess that we currently see with franchises I have mentioned in my previous post.

So why should the league keep franchises in certain American markets, and continue to neglect those in Canada?...Oh thats right - it's because there's the potential for something great to happen there :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it's a start; from Montreal Gazette :

Efforts to lure a National Hockey League team back to Quebec City intensified Tuesday as the province announced it will pay 45 per cent of the construction cost of a projected $400-million new hockey arena.

Quebec Premier Jean Charest said a feasibility study for an NHL-sized 18,000-seat arena showed it would be profitable — but only if the construction costs are entirely paid by public funds.

...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now