Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Quebec City getting new arena


  • Please log in to reply
125 replies to this topic

#21 MacK_Attack

MacK_Attack

    Old School

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,676 posts
  • Location:Ontario

Posted 07 September 2010 - 10:01 AM

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.

#22 cusimano_brothers

cusimano_brothers

    Legend

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,613 posts
  • Location:Niagara Falls, ON

Posted 07 September 2010 - 11:46 AM

...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.

"Mess up tomorrow, don't mess up now".

- Harry James Benson, CBE.


#23 eva unit zero

eva unit zero

    Save the Princess...Save the World

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,734 posts

Posted 07 September 2010 - 06:01 PM

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.
"I've never seen a warlock do that without his magic."
"I once devoured a monk's soul. It tasted like chocolate."

#24 F.Michael

F.Michael

    Old School Dynamic Duo

  • HoF Booster
  • 7,587 posts
  • Location:Wisconsin

Posted 07 September 2010 - 06:50 PM

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:

'Evolution' created by Offsides

#25 cusimano_brothers

cusimano_brothers

    Legend

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,613 posts
  • Location:Niagara Falls, ON

Posted 07 September 2010 - 06:55 PM

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.
...


"Mess up tomorrow, don't mess up now".

- Harry James Benson, CBE.


#26 eva unit zero

eva unit zero

    Save the Princess...Save the World

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,734 posts

Posted 07 September 2010 - 07:21 PM

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:


As far as attendance is concerned, Quebec's average per-game attendance hovered consistently around 14,000. Winnipeg's average was typically about 13,000. Both clubs had arenas with a much higher capacity. Both teams were bleeding money (similar to some of the small-market teams today) and new arenas would not have prevented the teams from moving. Perhaps they may not have moved when they did, but they likely still would have.
"I've never seen a warlock do that without his magic."
"I once devoured a monk's soul. It tasted like chocolate."

#27 F.Michael

F.Michael

    Old School Dynamic Duo

  • HoF Booster
  • 7,587 posts
  • Location:Wisconsin

Posted 07 September 2010 - 07:42 PM

As far as attendance is concerned, Quebec's average per-game attendance hovered consistently around 14,000. Winnipeg's average was typically about 13,000. Both clubs had arenas with a much higher capacity. Both teams were bleeding money (similar to some of the small-market teams today) and new arenas would not have prevented the teams from moving. Perhaps they may not have moved when they did, but they likely still would have.

The Colisée de Québec held up to 15,750, and the Winnipeg Arena 15,565...Back then there was little to no guarantee that either team would stay; Bettman didn't do much back then to keep teams in Canada like he does with teams in not so propserous areas here in the States.

Neither team was in bad of shape as what we have seen with a handful of franchises these past few years.

'Evolution' created by Offsides

#28 eva unit zero

eva unit zero

    Save the Princess...Save the World

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,734 posts

Posted 07 September 2010 - 08:07 PM

The Colisée de Québec held up to 15,750, and the Winnipeg Arena 15,565...Back then there was little to no guarantee that either team would stay; Bettman didn't do much back then to keep teams in Canada like he does with teams in not so propserous areas here in the States.

Neither team was in bad of shape as what we have seen with a handful of franchises these past few years.


Yes, of course, it's Bettman's fault because he didn't "do something" to help the teams. You realize that the NHL Board of Governors is who makes decisions and has the actual power to act, and Bettman is simply a face and a mediator/negotiator?

The 1994 and 2004 lockouts were both about what? How much the teams were paying the players; ultimately a salary cap. The NHL was paying a significant percentage more of its revenue to the players than other major sports leagues.

"I've never seen a warlock do that without his magic."
"I once devoured a monk's soul. It tasted like chocolate."

#29 _Kabrok_

_Kabrok_

    Top Prospect

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 56 posts

Posted 07 September 2010 - 09:22 PM

You know, if you're going to rant and rave about how the discrepancy of the Canadian dollar being a contributing if not primary reason for Winnipeg/QC is a quote, 'LIE and a MYTH', it would help to provide some, you know, evidence as to why precisely that's the case. If anything you contradict yourself by making such an emphasized point about how said teams were bleeding money - if two teams back in 95, one Canadian and one American, both have identical attendance but the League is based around the American dollar, which one is going to fare better? Hell, even if for argument's sake the Canadian team attracts 2000 more people a night it would still lag behind financially because guess what - the physical number of people attending games means jack s***, it's THE AMOUNT THEY SPEND TO BE THERE that matters. Forget economics, basic math makes it evident that the value of the loonie had a huge influence, particularly given that for a while there were threats that Toronto and Montreal would be the only teams that'd be able to keep their heads above water.

In any case it's irrelevant, the existence of a salary cap lends itself far better towards the viability of a team in either city today far better than the value of the loonie anyway.

Edited by _Kabrok_, 07 September 2010 - 09:23 PM.


#30 F.Michael

F.Michael

    Old School Dynamic Duo

  • HoF Booster
  • 7,587 posts
  • Location:Wisconsin

Posted 07 September 2010 - 11:09 PM


Yes, of course, it's Bettman's fault because he didn't "do something" to help the teams. You realize that the NHL Board of Governors is who makes decisions and has the actual power to act, and Bettman is simply a face and a mediator/negotiator?


Believe it, or not - yes, I am aware of the fact that Gary Bettman is more, or less a "mouthpiece" for the BOG, but unlike you I don't believe he's powerless, nor faultless in what goes on within the NHL.

IMHO he's partially responsible for the mess that we see today with a handful of NHL franchises (along with a few other issues as well), and there's good reasons why he gets booed every time he shows his face in an NHL arena.

'Evolution' created by Offsides

#31 F.Michael

F.Michael

    Old School Dynamic Duo

  • HoF Booster
  • 7,587 posts
  • Location:Wisconsin

Posted 07 September 2010 - 11:15 PM

You know, if you're going to rant and rave about how the discrepancy of the Canadian dollar being a contributing if not primary reason for Winnipeg/QC is a quote, 'LIE and a MYTH', it would help to provide some, you know, evidence as to why precisely that's the case. If anything you contradict yourself by making such an emphasized point about how said teams were bleeding money - if two teams back in 95, one Canadian and one American, both have identical attendance but the League is based around the American dollar, which one is going to fare better? Hell, even if for argument's sake the Canadian team attracts 2000 more people a night it would still lag behind financially because guess what - the physical number of people attending games means jack s***, it's THE AMOUNT THEY SPEND TO BE THERE that matters. Forget economics, basic math makes it evident that the value of the loonie had a huge influence, particularly given that for a while there were threats that Toronto and Montreal would be the only teams that'd be able to keep their heads above water.

In any case it's irrelevant, the existence of a salary cap lends itself far better towards the viability of a team in either city today far better than the value of the loonie anyway.

Which is why teams like Phoenix/Nashville/Atlanta/NYI/Florida (take your pick) should pack-up, and move to a more prosperous location, and I don't mean Las Vegas, or KC.

'Evolution' created by Offsides

#32 Shady Ultima

Shady Ultima

    2nd Line Scorer

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 584 posts

Posted 08 September 2010 - 01:36 AM

Bring Winnipeg, Hartford and Quebec back! And add a team in Seattle. All done, all fixed.

#33 cusimano_brothers

cusimano_brothers

    Legend

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,613 posts
  • Location:Niagara Falls, ON

Posted 08 September 2010 - 07:57 PM

Flip-flop; from TSN :

The federal government poured fuel on speculation Wednesday that it might be ready to spend an estimated $180 million to help build a hockey arena in the hope of bringing an NHL team back to Quebec City.

First, the government said it was "very interested" in the project to build a new arena. Later Wednesday, Quebec City Conservative MPs illustrated their own eagerness by wearing the old blue-and-white jersey of the defunct Nordiques to a public event.
...


Why all this sudden interest?

...
The Tories have 11 seats in Quebec and holding on to them is key to achieving their coveted majority in a future election. Most of those seats are in Quebec City.
...


"Mess up tomorrow, don't mess up now".

- Harry James Benson, CBE.


#34 Barrie

Barrie

    Legend

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,922 posts

Posted 09 September 2010 - 09:47 PM

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.

Yea Quebec no doubt will sell out every game, but I wonder if they have the corporate support to fill the suites?

Bring Winnipeg, Hartford and Quebec back! And add a team in Seattle. All done, all fixed.

I'd rather go to Houston than Hartford.
Lets Go:
Red Wings
Tigers
Roughriders
Lions
Spartans
Pistons

#35 cusimano_brothers

cusimano_brothers

    Legend

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,613 posts
  • Location:Niagara Falls, ON

Posted 10 September 2010 - 07:14 AM

Meanwhile, to the west; from Edmonton Journal :

Though millions in government money appears headed to new arena project in Quebec City, hockey fans in Calgary and Edmonton should not expect the same in Alberta, Premier Ed Stelmach said Thursday.

“As I said before, there won’t be any public money going to the arenas. We’re trying to catch up with badly needed infrastructure in health and schools.”
...


I guess he's not looking for votes like they are in Quebec.

"Mess up tomorrow, don't mess up now".

- Harry James Benson, CBE.


#36 cusimano_brothers

cusimano_brothers

    Legend

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,613 posts
  • Location:Niagara Falls, ON

Posted 10 September 2010 - 02:44 PM

A voice of reason; but of all people. From Toronto Star :

Maxime Bernier is onside with his fellow Tories who are interested in seeing the NHL back in Quebec City, but the Conservative MP stresses not at any price.
...

...
He also noted the country has a $56-billion deficit and that the Tories need to slash spending.

Bernier said if Quebec City gets funding, then other cities will be lining up for their cash.

And the former cabinet minister says that could eventually cost the government up to $1 billion.

“If we offer this money to Quebec City, then other cities in Canada will ask, so at the end of the line it’s a question of $1 billion or $800 million if we want to be fair to all regions,” Bernier said in the interview Thursday.
...


"Mess up tomorrow, don't mess up now".

- Harry James Benson, CBE.


#37 cusimano_brothers

cusimano_brothers

    Legend

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,613 posts
  • Location:Niagara Falls, ON

Posted 12 September 2010 - 04:24 PM

From TSN :

The head of the Canadian Olympic Committee is calling on Western Canada to rally behind the idea of building a new hockey rink in Quebec City with federal funds.

Marcel Aubut, a former president of the defunct Quebec Nordiques hockey club, told Radio-Canada over the weekend that there were many reasons for the West to get behind the project.

He said a new arena would serve not only as a home for an NHL team, but would sweeten the city's bid to host the Olympics.

"(The West's support) would be a nice gesture, especially if Quebec becomes a contender for the Olympics," Aubut told the broadcaster.

"It becomes a chance to represent not only the province and the city, but the country as well."
...


To me, this indicates that the COC doesn't believe in drug testing their president.

"Mess up tomorrow, don't mess up now".

- Harry James Benson, CBE.


#38 cusimano_brothers

cusimano_brothers

    Legend

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,613 posts
  • Location:Niagara Falls, ON

Posted 14 September 2010 - 06:59 AM

From Montreal Gazette :

Prime Minister Stephen Harper moved Monday to dampen the political brush fire over a proposed NHL hockey rink in Quebec City, stressing the private sector is primarily responsible for bankrolling professional sports teams and the upcoming period of federal “fiscal restraint” will determine whether his government can afford to play any role.
...

...
Harper said Monday he wants to “be clear” about his view on the matter, noting that his government has received “demands for new infrastructure for NHL and CFL teams” from across the country.

Our position has been clear,” the prime minister said.

“We’re all fans of professional sports. We know they’re important to our communities, but professional sports are first and foremost the responsibility of the private sector, and if there is to be any role for the federal government, first of all, that role would have to be equitable across the country, treat everybody the same. And it also has to be affordable, recognizing that this country is going to be moving into a period of fiscal restraint.”
...


"Mess up tomorrow, don't mess up now".

- Harry James Benson, CBE.


#39 cusimano_brothers

cusimano_brothers

    Legend

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,613 posts
  • Location:Niagara Falls, ON

Posted 02 October 2010 - 09:09 AM

From TSN:

It will be a Quebec Nordiques lovefest today.

Tens of thousands of people -- perhaps over 50,000 -- are expected in Quebec City to participate in what's being called the "Blue March."

People are demanding the return of NHL hockey, 15 years after the city's beloved Nordiques left town.
...

Demanding?

"Mess up tomorrow, don't mess up now".

- Harry James Benson, CBE.


#40 Dominator2005

Dominator2005

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,227 posts

Posted 03 October 2010 - 10:09 AM

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.



1. How can you compare economical situation in Qc from '94 to '10 - Do you live in Qc? Can you compare global economical situation in US?
2. In '90s $1.00can = +/-$0.60us - now it's almost 1:1
3. In '90s - salary cap was issue, Marcel Aubut was asking in '94 for salary cup.
4. Unemployment % in '90 (Québec) was around 15% and today is less than 4% in Québec city.
5. Attendance history - please revisit your numbers.
6. MORE THAN 40% OF TOTAL NHL INCOMING IS COMING FROM CANADA (FROM 6 TEAMS). THAT'S A HUGE!!!
"Some guys dream about scoring goals, or making big saves... I swear to God I dream about kicking ass in a hockey fight - no other way to say it than I love to do it, its who I am"... Brian McGrattan





Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users