PASabreFan Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 I'd be ok with the secondary market collapsing because it would hopefully lead to lower prices set by the team. Right now the amateur scalpers are taking a loss which would hopefully lead to a decrease in season tickets sales to the people buying entire rows or sections of seats. Waiting lists for season tickets will erode and teams will have to lower prices to avoid empty arenas. Right now they are losing some money on empty arenas due to getting less revenue from parking and concessions but the majority of the tickets have already been sold. Once the scalpers stop giving them guaranteed sales they feel the pinch more and either have to drop prices or improve the game to increase demand. This is great in theory and I hope it comes to pass. Well said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 It's not just Buffalo. When Buffalo plays a road game there are empty seats, and it's not just because they are playing the Sabres. Arena's all over may very well be sold out, but the secondary market is not there. There are a lot of empty seats. Any one catch the Washington-Detroit game on NBCSN last night? That place should have been packed and rocking but there where a lot of empty seats and it was sedate. The game has lot something. Scoring is down, the hate/rivalry between players and teams has been lost. I just thought it was me or Sabres fans in general because of the tank. But I keep seeing the lack of fan enthusiasm as I watch other games and don't think it's just a Buffalo problem. I've watched a lot of other games this season and I'm seeing the same thing. Even in Canada. It's worse here in Carolina than it's ever been. Announced crowds of 10k are at most 5-6k. I think we've got a combination of factors: crappy economy (so less disposable income), steadily increasing prices, lower scoring and less interest at this point in the season due to football. If the secondary market is collapsing, is that a good thing? How do we end up with 19,070 people who want to be in the building, every game, never sell to the enemy, and cheer their ###### off? There's a huge regional population in the Sabres market, how many hundreds of thousands of people? Is it too much to ask? Sports tickets shouldn't be an economic opportunity. Well, if the secondary market is collapsing, I think that's a pretty good indicator of overall reduction in demand -- which is not good for full arenas and electric atmospheres. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkard Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 This is great in theory and I hope it comes to pass. Well said. It's definitely a bit of wishful thinking but it's possible so I'll keep hoping. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woods-racer Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 I thought ticket prices we not allowed to fall. That the league and PA had an agreement that seat prices where to increase yearly. Or I am getting confused with revenue sharing, where teams have to stay within in a certain price threshold to receive it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 (edited) I thought ticket prices we not allowed to fall. That the league and PA had an agreement that seat prices where to increase yearly. Or I am getting confused with revenue sharing, where teams have to stay within in a certain price threshold to receive it? If there's an obligation to raise prices, it's an unwritten one. It's not in the CBA. For example, the Leafs didn't raise prices this year. But they don't qualify for revenue sharing, so they didn't have to worry about any ramifications there. It's tricky. If you don't raise ticket prices, or if you don't hit the target of 75% of the average gate around the league, you don't automatically lose your revenue sharing. But you then have to submit a plan for how you are going to turn things around and you might be subject to oversight from the Revenue Sharing Oversight Committee, made up of reps from the owners and players. It's not really punitive. The goal is to help turn around a financially struggling franchise. The final hammer is the loss of revenue sharing, sort of a last resort. This has been hotly debated over the years on here every time Pegula has raised prices and people say, well, he had no choice, he would have lost revenue sharing had he not done it. The question of whether a freespending multi billionaire needs a welfare check from other owners is a fair one. One year, Ted Black came out and said he couldn't leave that money on the table, because he couldn't assume Terry and his money bags would be around forever. Ted liked to muddy the waters and benefited from fan and media misunderstanding of the issue. As a lawyer, he was careful to use the word "jeopardize." "If we don't raise prices, we jeopardize revenue sharing." (Paraphrase.) The discussion is made even trickier by the fact Pegula has owned the team under two CBAs. The first had a different revenue target (overall growth in revenues, even non ticket revenues, IIRC) and was more punitive if you didn't hit that target and wanted to continue to receive revenue sharing. All from memory. I think it's accurate though. Edited December 9, 2015 by pASabreFan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 I think we've got a combination of factors: crappy economy (so less disposable income), steadily increasing prices, lower scoring and less interest at this point in the season due to football. Well, if the secondary market is collapsing, I think that's a pretty good indicator of overall reduction in demand -- which is not good for full arenas and electric atmospheres. I think my thinking, probably flawed, is that as speculators leave the market, "real fans" from the waiting list would move in. That assumes the waiting list isn't full of speculators. And I can hear PTR saying, hey, the "real fans" could be buying tickets on the secondary market. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 I think my thinking, probably flawed, is that as speculators leave the market, "real fans" from the waiting list would move in. That assumes the waiting list isn't full of speculators. And I can hear PTR saying, hey, the "real fans" could be buying tickets on the secondary market. Because I have a point. You can't argue speculators are blocking "real" fans from buying tickets when those same tickets are going for half of face value on StubHub and they still aren't buying them. Speaking of atmosphere at games, even Edmonton struck me as pretty dead too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 I think my thinking, probably flawed, is that as speculators leave the market, "real fans" from the waiting list would move in. That assumes the waiting list isn't full of speculators. And I can hear PTR saying, hey, the "real fans" could be buying tickets on the secondary market. The secondary market is ideal for people like me. Out of towner who wants good seats for the only game they will attend... For the record, I never sat behind the goal before and it was great. I recommend PTR's tix to anyone who doesn't have a fear of heights. haha Because I have a point. You can't argue speculators are blocking "real" fans from buying tickets when those same tickets are going for half of face value on StubHub and they still aren't buying them. Speaking of atmosphere at games, even Edmonton struck me as pretty dead too. Bad things happen to those who lose a captive audience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 The secondary market is ideal for people like me. Out of towner who wants good seats for the only game they will attend... For the record, I never sat behind the goal before and it was great. I recommend PTR's tix to anyone who doesn't have a fear of heights. haha Bad things happen to those who lose a captive audience. Hockey is great viewed up high from the end zone. Glad you liked them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 Hockey is great viewed up high from the end zone. Glad you liked them. 11 year old daughter was super freaked though. Started crying. I spent most of the game with my arm around her. haha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 This has been hotly debated over the years on here every time Pegula has raised prices and people say, well, he had no choice, he would have lost revenue sharing had he not done it. The question of whether a freespending multi billionaire needs a welfare check from other owners is a fair one. One year, Ted Black came out and said he couldn't leave that money on the table, because he couldn't assume Terry and his money bags would be around forever. Ted liked to muddy the waters and benefited from fan and media misunderstanding of the issue. As a lawyer, he was careful to use the word "jeopardize." "If we don't raise prices, we jeopardize revenue sharing." (Paraphrase.) I honestly believe Pegula is looking at the long game. For whatever reason, he my have to make an exit at some point. If he leaves behind a team that's spending well past it's income it's a less attractive business investment for a new owner, meaning the team would have to be taken on by another owner that wants to spend his own money keeping the team afloat. The pool of billionaire hockey fans in Buffalo is pretty small, there are far more in other cities with no particular reason to keep the team where it is. Keep the team at least near even and I'm confident Buffalo will find someone to buy it. Besides, the tickets go directly to revenue, which determines the salary cap, which determines how much money Pegula can throw around to get the right players in here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woods-racer Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 Thank you pA. Now I remember why I can't remember. It's confusing. So I was right to remember being confused. It appears that lowering ticket prices would be met with great criticism by any club selling a majority of their arena's seats to STH. But not raising them is ok if in the top 1/2 of the pricing tier, which the Sabres don't fall into. So I am assuming that in order for ticket prices to decrease the effects of fan disappointment of the on ice product would need to be almost league wide. Because if only 5 or 6 teams where to go that route they could be subject to *the committee*, and the rest would be ok with that. So the only way for teams with poor STH sales/ game day sales to increase sales is by gimmicks. Unless the rest of the league agrees to price cutting, or the very least a ticket price freeze. I call snow ball in hell. I think my thinking, probably flawed, is that as speculators leave the market, "real fans" from the waiting list would move in. That assumes the waiting list isn't full of speculators. And I can hear PTR saying, hey, the "real fans" could be buying tickets on the secondary market. Real fans are limited. How many people work/live within a 1/2 hour of FNC. A game is a big event. Not only in terms of money but time and travel. I make one or 2 games a year. It's a big event for us. Love STH that put them on Stub Hub. I think your speculators are a thin crowd here in Buffalo. I believe they're more like PTR. Has the money to purchase, but not necessarily the money/time to go to all the games. With a little work (work is key here, cause it becomes a PITA quick) he is able to get to a point that the tickets are within his budget by recovering his money. I am assuming that PTR can not make all the games, picks out games he can make, tries to sell the rest. If nobody buys the tickets he's not living in a cardboard box at the end of the season, but the pinch will be felt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 I honestly believe Pegula is looking at the long game. For whatever reason, he my have to make an exit at some point. If he leaves behind a team that's spending well past it's income it's a less attractive business investment for a new owner, meaning the team would have to be taken on by another owner that wants to spend his own money keeping the team afloat. The pool of billionaire hockey fans in Buffalo is pretty small, there are far more in other cities with no particular reason to keep the team where it is. Keep the team at least near even and I'm confident Buffalo will find someone to buy it. Besides, the tickets go directly to revenue, which determines the salary cap, which determines how much money Pegula can throw around to get the right players in here. Regardless, I'm praying for a LARGE market collapse in all sports that shave 75% off of current ticket prices. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 Because I have a point. You can't argue speculators are blocking "real" fans from buying tickets when those same tickets are going for half of face value on StubHub and they still aren't buying them. Speaking of atmosphere at games, even Edmonton struck me as pretty dead too. They did get a good "Connor's better" chant going. I don't think FNC has an "Eichel's playing" chant in it. 11 year old daughter was super freaked though. Started crying. I spent most of the game with my arm around her. haha That's funny. I never had that feeling sitting up there. Now, the oranges at the Aud... i yi yi. She wouldn't have made it through the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 11 year old daughter was super freaked though. Started crying. I spent most of the game with my arm around her. hahaGood thing the Sabres aren't still playing in the Aud. The Oranges were twice as steep as the FNC 300's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 They did get a good "Connor's better" chant going. I don't think FNC has an "Eichel's playing" chant in it. That's funny. I never had that feeling sitting up there. Now, the oranges at the Aud... i yi yi. She wouldn't have made it through the game. Good thing the Sabres aren't still playing in the Aud. The Oranges were twice as steep as the FNC 300's. That's what I tried to tell her, but she wasn't buying it. She wouldn't even stand for the National Anthem or for goals. :doh: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 Thank you pA. Now I remember why I can't remember. It's confusing. So I was right to remember being confused. It appears that lowering ticket prices would be met with great criticism by any club selling a majority of their arena's seats to STH. But not raising them is ok if in the top 1/2 of the pricing tier, which the Sabres don't fall into. So I am assuming that in order for ticket prices to decrease the effects of fan disappointment of the on ice product would need to be almost league wide. Because if only 5 or 6 teams where to go that route they could be subject to *the committee*, and the rest would be ok with that. So the only way for teams with poor STH sales/ game day sales to increase sales is by gimmicks. Unless the rest of the league agrees to price cutting, or the very least a ticket price freeze. I call snow ball in hell. Real fans are limited. How many people work/live within a 1/2 hour of FNC. A game is a big event. Not only in terms of money but time and travel. I make one or 2 games a year. It's a big event for us. Love STH that put them on Stub Hub. I think your speculators are a thin crowd here in Buffalo. I believe they're more like PTR. Has the money to purchase, but not necessarily the money/time to go to all the games. With a little work (work is key here, cause it becomes a PITA quick) he is able to get to a point that the tickets are within his budget by recovering his money. I am assuming that PTR can not make all the games, picks out games he can make, tries to sell the rest. If nobody buys the tickets he's not living in a cardboard box at the end of the season, but the pinch will be felt. Pretty much nailed it. I live 500 miles away. I schedule trips home on the Sabres and Bills schedules. This way I have my choice of games, guaranteed access to playoff tickets and access to the Lexus Club pregame. And yes, it's work managing tickets, but I choose to do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 I honestly believe Pegula is looking at the long game. For whatever reason, he my have to make an exit at some point. If he leaves behind a team that's spending well past it's income it's a less attractive business investment for a new owner, meaning the team would have to be taken on by another owner that wants to spend his own money keeping the team afloat. The pool of billionaire hockey fans in Buffalo is pretty small, there are far more in other cities with no particular reason to keep the team where it is. Keep the team at least near even and I'm confident Buffalo will find someone to buy it. Besides, the tickets go directly to revenue, which determines the salary cap, which determines how much money Pegula can throw around to get the right players in here. I dunno. I've never been able to wrap my head around this line of thinking. If the team is losing lots of money year after year because the owner is free-spending and not maximizing revenues, why would a new owner care? It's not going to be his or her problem. The new owner would think, well, I can run a tighter ship, right? By the way, does anyone know if the Sabres are making or losing money for Pegula? He's gotta be losing I would think. But no one sees the books. The other question is: who buys a small-market professional sports team to make money year by year? You make money when you sell, like OSP did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 I dunno. I've never been able to wrap my head around this line of thinking. If the team is losing lots of money year after year because the owner is free-spending and not maximizing revenues, why would a new owner care? It's not going to be his or her problem. The new owner would think, well, I can run a tighter ship, right? By the way, does anyone know if the Sabres are making or losing money for Pegula? He's gotta be losing I would think. But no one sees the books. The other question is: who buys a small-market professional sports team to make money year by year? You make money when you sell, like OSP did. The new owner may not relish the idea of coming in and saying, "I want to thank the City of Buffalo and the fans for the warm welcome you've given me, it's truly an honor to be part of Sabres history, and my goal is to win another 3 Stanley Cups as owner. By the way, I don't have $3B sitting around, so effective today ticket prices go up by 20% to get back to 95% of the league average. I'm sure you all understand, I have to run a tighter ship." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 The new owner may not relish the idea of coming in and saying, "I want to thank the City of Buffalo and the fans for the warm welcome you've given me, it's truly an honor to be part of Sabres history, and my goal is to win another 3 Stanley Cups as owner. By the way, I don't have $3B sitting around, so effective today ticket prices go up by 20% to get back to 95% of the league average. I'm sure you all understand, I have to run a tighter ship." I think that's an entirely fair and even... wait, wut... WE WON THREE CUPS!!!!!!!! Seriously, I've never been one of those "tickets should be a buck! 10 cent beers, Pegula can afford it" people. But the annual ticket price increases, some of them the steepest in the league, even through 30th place finishes, then acting like they had no choice in the matter, were pretty galling. After last season, as a gesture to acknowledge the fans' patience and suffering, they could have pulled a Toronto and not raised ticket prices. It wouldn't have been end days. They wouldn't have lost their revenue sharing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted December 10, 2015 Report Share Posted December 10, 2015 Why is anyone mentioning a new owner? :unsure: The next ones name will sure end in Pegula. This is going to be generational now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woods-racer Posted December 10, 2015 Report Share Posted December 10, 2015 Why is anyone mentioning a new owner? :unsure: The next ones name will sure end in Pegula. This is going to be generational now. I put odds at 50/50 for generational. NYS inheritance tax is not friendly to such things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted December 10, 2015 Report Share Posted December 10, 2015 I put odds at 50/50 for generational. NYS inheritance tax is not friendly to such things. Taxes after an inheritance on the team will be a thought for about two seconds with the kind of money these folks have. It will be more a matter of if the kids wish to own it and I bet at least one will take and keep the legacy alive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted December 10, 2015 Report Share Posted December 10, 2015 Taxes after an inheritance on the team will be a thought for about two seconds with the kind of money these folks have. It will be more a matter of if the kids wish to own it and I bet at least one will take and keep the legacy alive. Kim Pegula is about 47 years old... She will be the owner for a long, long time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted December 10, 2015 Report Share Posted December 10, 2015 Taxes after an inheritance on the team will be a thought for about two seconds with the kind of money these folks have. It will be more a matter of if the kids wish to own it and I bet at least one will take and keep the legacy alive. How did the Wilson's wealth compare to the Pegula's? Ralph thought long and hard about that inheritance tax and how it would affect his children and arranged for the team to be sold. Don't discount the affect that inheritance tax would have. Kim Pegula is about 47 years old... She will be the owner for a long, long time. And this, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.