Eleven Posted July 24, 2006 Report Share Posted July 24, 2006 Today's column has him questioning the long-term viability of the Sabres, based upon the arbitration award to Briere. I thought some of the posters here were too doom & gloom; now we have a columnist suggesting that the team will have to move. He's nuts, and the column borders on irresponsibility. First, he should realize (and he may realize it but has nothing else to write about) that small operating losses for a big-league pro team are just fine. The asset appreciates over the long haul anyway. That $3M of the Sabres' $7M profit of last year would be eaten if Briere were re-signed has nothing whatsoever to do with whether the team survives. Second, there's no evidence to suggest that the team wouldn't be competitive if it chose either not to re-sign Briere or to sign and trade. We'd all prefer to see him here; however, the team missed him for nearly half the season and still managed to finish two points out of first. I really hope the Sabres keep him around. Class act, fun to watch on the ice, star potential. But Bucky needs to settle down and realize that if Briere leaves, things probably will be just fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmwolf21 Posted July 24, 2006 Report Share Posted July 24, 2006 I don't know about it being irresponsible; I think he just said what a lot of Sabres' fans have thought about or had in the back of their mind, and are afraid to talk about. With Briere, though, the Sabres could keep him, signing him to a long-term deal at $5M+, but in the process would have to continue saying goodbye to other key players and use AHL-level players to populate their 3rd & 4th lines. I don't think its the cost of doing business in the new NHL; rather I prefer to think that Darcy and co. want to make sure they don't go the way of Philly and NYR; one or two top lines and nothing to scare anyone from lines 3 & 4. BTW - that link is incorrect - here is the right one: http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20060724/1063014.asp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frisky Posted July 24, 2006 Report Share Posted July 24, 2006 I have to admit I'm probably one of the doom and gloom ppl. But, I do think that Bucky has some valid points in his article. From how things are going this off-season and if salaries and revenues continue to increase in the future, we won't be able to hold on to the likes of Briere or Drury or Miller in the coming future. And, since the team already has the lowest avg. ticket prices in the league, they aren't generating as much revenue from the gates as all the other teams. I think for the team to survive in the future, after we've lost all our blossomed players, we will have to find a way to compete with AHL caliber players and 3rd to 4th line NHL players. Also, Lindy's contract expires after this year as well. I've been thinking that he may want to leave as well seeing how things are progressing and he may not have the level of talent that he would like to have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob_sauve28 Posted July 24, 2006 Report Share Posted July 24, 2006 I don't know about it being irresponsible; I think he just said what a lot of Sabres' fans have thought about or had in the back of their mind, and are afraid to talk about. With Briere, though, the Sabres could keep him, signing him to a long-term deal at $5M+, but in the process would have to continue saying goodbye to other key players and use AHL-level players to populate their 3rd & 4th lines. I don't think its the cost of doing business in the new NHL; rather I prefer to think that Darcy and co. want to make sure they don't go the way of Philly and NYR; one or two top lines and nothing to scare anyone from lines 3 & 4. BTW - that link is incorrect - here is the right one: http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20060724/1063014.asp Well it sure does seem like the new players agreement doesn't favor small market teams the way it should. The cap is a friggin joke. Its way to high. That said, other teams have this arbitration process, too and might have to cut some people who will be available on the cheap. Who knows, it might workl out after all, only without Brier, which sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted July 24, 2006 Report Share Posted July 24, 2006 frisky, regarding revenues... I think the Sabres have to test this market to see what people are really willing to pay to keep the team here. If the Sabres make the commitment to winning, I don't see any way in Hell that they should have the lowest ticket prices in the league. That's crazy. I don't buy the notion that the economy of the area dictates low ticket prices. I think mediocrity on the ice has dictated that. And the vicious circle keeps going round and round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted July 24, 2006 Report Share Posted July 24, 2006 The problem is, almost every year, salaries for good players are going to increase and a team like the Sabres whoa re trying to watch every penny, won't be able to afford established good players and will be consistently for to cut or trade players they have established into stars for cheaper alternatives and take the gamble that they work out. You also have to remember that not every fan is a hockey expert and studies the stats like some here do and can come up with silver linings for every player leaving. A player like Briere is a team leader and a huge Fan Favorite. When fans see their favorite players being dealt due to money issues, they aren't going to blame the player, they will blame the team. They aren't going to sit there and study the Sabres economic structure and say, well his salary just won't fit due to the budget that is in place. They see a Billionaire owner pinching pennies to make sure he turns a profit, and a very good player being shown the door. It sucks that it works this way and because of that, TG may end up selling the team away to someone who could move them if he finds that it is not possible to keep the team competitive and in the black. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted July 24, 2006 Report Share Posted July 24, 2006 Second, there's no evidence to suggest that the team wouldn't be competitive if it chose either not to re-sign Briere or to sign and trade. We'd all prefer to see him here; however, the team missed him for nearly half the season and still managed to finish two points out of first. This is really the truth. Don't get me wrong, I love watching Danny Briere play, but to compensate him like a Peter Forsberg ( a man that can truly dominate a game and win in a 1 line system) is a dodgy proposition if it compromises the overall health of your team. The Sabres were playing very good hockey while Briere and Dumont were sidelined. Even without him, I still think this is still a very good team. Is Buffalo a better roster without him, no. But Ottawa isn't a better roster, neither is NJ who stand to lose Gionta and Gomez, or Carolina for that matter - the three division champs. So far it looks like Bob Gainey may be having the best offseason. It is too early to panic and sell the franchise. The problem is, almost every year, salaries for good players are going to increase and a team like the Sabres whoa re trying to watch every penny, won't be able to afford established good players and will be consistently for to cut or trade players they have established into stars for cheaper alternatives and take the gamble that they work out. Yep. That is the reality. They see a Billionaire owner pinching pennies to make sure he turns a profit, and a very good player being shown the door. I don't think TG is demanding a profit. He just wants the team to be a viable enterprise, which means not losing $10 Mil a year. I think the guy would be tickled if everything breaks even. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted July 24, 2006 Report Share Posted July 24, 2006 I don't think TG is demanding a profit. He just wants the team to be a viable enterprise, which means not losing $10 Mil a year. I think the guy would be tickled if everything breaks even. Well, whats the point in owning the team if he isn't demanding a profit? Why would you invest time and money into something that was not an interest of yours (he said when he bought the team he didn't really follow hockey) and be happy with just breaking even? This team will not be a viable enterprise if all it can do is break even every year. They need to pull in a profit to bring themselves up the the level of other teams in the league and stay competitive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmwolf21 Posted July 24, 2006 Report Share Posted July 24, 2006 frisky, regarding revenues... I think the Sabres have to test this market to see what people are really willing to pay to keep the team here. If the Sabres make the commitment to winning, I don't see any way in Hell that they should have the lowest ticket prices in the league. That's crazy. I don't buy the notion that the economy of the area dictates low ticket prices. I think mediocrity on the ice has dictated that. And the vicious circle keeps going round and round. I don't disagree that mediocrity on the ice plays some part in ticket prices and ticket sales, but if you think that the economy of WNY can support tickets in the range of the Leafs or Avs, you're smoking something. WNY has a dwindling population, one of the highest tax rates in the nation, a minimal corporate presence, and is blessed to have political leadership that continues driving the area and economy into the ground. Raising ticket prices would be a short-term bandaid on the problem - eventually the tickets will be priced out of the fans' reach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rickshaw Posted July 24, 2006 Report Share Posted July 24, 2006 People forget that last year was a very good year on the ice. But who's to say that revenues will be better this year? If it isn't, the players have to pay back that escrow dough. Possibly the cap goes down after this year. It's very tough to say. I think this team must pay up this year and see what happens. Not saying right to the cap limit but around $37 to $40 million. Golisano has made money already and if he pays up and the team continues to play well, he will make more. He could very well flip this team sooner than later if that does happen, for a very tidy profit. All we can do is hope our team is solid and continues to play well. It was sooooooooooo much fun last year. I want that feeling to continue. We will see if the owners do as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted July 24, 2006 Report Share Posted July 24, 2006 Well, whats the point in owning the team if he isn't demanding a profit? Why would you invest time and money into something that was not an interest of yours (he said when he bought the team he didn't really follow hockey) and be happy with just breaking even? The guy is a philanthropist, and thought that the team is culturallly important to the region. This team will not be a viable enterprise if all it can do is break even every year. They need to pull in a profit to bring themselves up the the level of other teams in the league and stay competitive. Not really. In the old CBA teams could outspend Buffalo by $40 million dollars. This year most teams will only outspend Buffalo by $5 million, and at most $9. They will remain competitive, but they will be more like the Minn. Twins and Oakland A's in baseball. They will depend on a deep farm system and will have to be constantly developing talent. They will lose top end stars, but will have to fill a roster with role players and undervalued players. If by viable, you mean that they will compete for the Stanley cup every year, that will be difficult. If by viable you mean a team that stays out of bankruptcy and teeters on profitability from year to year they will be fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted July 24, 2006 Report Share Posted July 24, 2006 I don't disagree that mediocrity on the ice plays some part in ticket prices and ticket sales, but if you think that the economy of WNY can support tickets in the range of the Leafs or Avs, you're smoking something. WNY has a dwindling population, one of the highest tax rates in the nation, a minimal corporate presence, and is blessed to have political leadership that continues driving the area and economy into the ground. Raising ticket prices would be a short-term bandaid on the problem - eventually the tickets will be priced out of the fans' reach. Well, If the economy can't support a moderate increase in ticket prices, it is not going to be able to continue to support the team. There will come a point where they will have to either increase ticket prices to keep up with the rest of the lague, or risk being competitive just to break even. Its unfortunate, but it could lead the Sabres right out of town. The team has to stay winning to keep the fans coming back, the fans don't have the money to waste on a team that is not able to compete, and to stay competitive they will have to spend some money occasionally. With TG being a buisness man first, I can't see him go through many seasons of breaking even or losing money with the team before he puts it up for sale, and i really wonder how hard the NHL will fight for Buffalo when they are up for sale because they can't make money, unlike last time where it was because of crooked ownership forcing them into bankrupcy. The guy is a philanthropist, and thought that the team is culturallly important to the region. Not really. In the old CBA teams could outspend Buffalo by $40 million dollars. This year most teams will only outspend Buffalo by $5 million, and at most $9. They will remain competitive, but they will be more like the Minn. Twins and Oakland A's in baseball. They will depend on a deep farm system and will have to be constantly developing talent. They will lose top end stars, but will have to fill a roster with role players and undervalued players. If by viable, you mean that they will compete for the Stanley cup every year, that will be difficult. If by viable you mean a team that stays out of bankruptcy and teeters on profitability from year to year they will be fine. Well seeing how the Twins and A's have been dominating the playoffs and championships for all these years, I guess I could live with the Sabres being like that. :rolleyes: So Golisano bought the team to do something good for the Buffalo area? If it is true, it was a nice gesture, but I have a feeling thet it may also be just another buisness for him and it would get his name out in the public even more incase he decides to run for office again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BetweenThePipes00 Posted July 24, 2006 Report Share Posted July 24, 2006 They will remain competitive, but they will be more like the Minn. Twins and Oakland A's in baseball. They will depend on a deep farm system and will have to be constantly developing talent. They will lose top end stars, but will have to fill a roster with role players and undervalued players. Exactly ... the Twins or the A's, that needs to be the model. I know everyone wants it to be the 1990-93 Bills, but teams do not stay together like that anymore. And i know that people will say "Yeah but you have to sign Briere, it's JUST one guy, we have to keep him b and then watch costs like the Twins or A's. problem is, it only takes one guy to throw the whole thing out of whack. People do not like "Moneyball" because it is cold and calculating and people get attached to players, but it makes sense and it works. But fans are impatient and want quick fixes and those things will not happen. If by viable, you mean that they will compete for the Stanley cup every year, that will be difficult. If by viable you mean a team that stays out of bankruptcy and teeters on profitability from year to year they will be fine. This is not likely to generate much excitement and have people running to the ticket window. I think if they do it right they can make the playoffs every year and make the occasional run at the big prize, which to me is all ANY team can expect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted July 24, 2006 Author Report Share Posted July 24, 2006 I'm not sure the local economy is that much of an issue. Buffalonians may make less than residents of many other NHL cities, but when actual interest in hockey is figured into the equation, the Sabres' yearly take from gate shouldn't be far off the numbers in Phoenix, Atlanta, Washington, and several other cities with higher average wages. No, it's not Colorado or Toronto. That's ok, though. It isn't Pittsburgh or Phoenix, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted July 24, 2006 Report Share Posted July 24, 2006 Well, If the economy can't support a moderate increase in ticket prices, it is not going to be able to continue to support the team. There will come a point where they will have to either increase ticket prices to keep up with the rest of the lague, or risk being competitive just to break even. Its unfortunate, but it could lead the Sabres right out of town. The team has to stay winning to keep the fans coming back, the fans don't have the money to waste on a team that is not able to compete, and to stay competitive they will have to spend some money occasionally. With TG being a buisness man first, I can't see him go through many seasons of breaking even or losing money with the team before he puts it up for sale, and i really wonder how hard the NHL will fight for Buffalo when they are up for sale because they can't make money, unlike last time where it was because of crooked ownership forcing them into bankrupcy. Well seeing how the Twins and A's have been dominating the playoffs and championships for all these years, I guess I could live with the Sabres being like that. :rolleyes: So Golisano bought the team to do something good for the Buffalo area? If it is true, it was a nice gesture, but I have a feeling thet it may also be just another buisness for him and it would get his name out in the public even more incase he decides to run for office again. You most likely are correct with your 1st sentence. The thing is, that IF is a big word. I expect that as the Sabres continue to be successful on the ice, we will see the Sabres bring "moderate" increases in ticket prices. It looks like they did this year, even though there were "no" official increases in ticket prices (except for a minor tweaking up of the cheap 100 levels that was offset by a minor tweaking down of the cheap 300 levels). It's been reported that the Sabres increased the number of high end games and reduced the number of value games, so while prices "stayed the same", they did in fact increase. While the Sabres aren't the 1st organization to go to variable pricing, it is still a very smart thing to do and I applaud them for it. It allows the Sabres to account for price elasticity in a non-blatently obvious way. (Hey, it's 2009, due to injuries and some attempts at retooling the Sabres are coming off a less than successful season. OK, keep ticket prices constant and increase the # of value games to keep the beer sales up.) I don't see the Sabres pulling up stakes any time soon. Buffalo is a hockey town and the powers that be know it. Even in years that the Sabres stink, Buffalo has one of the 3 highest playoff TV ratings in the country. When the Sabres are in the playoffs, Buffalo's ratings blow the roof off the rest of the league. Also, Jeremy Jacobs, who may be the league's most powerful owner, is a Buffalo boy. Whether the Sabres hit a rough patch or not, I would be far more concerned about the Bills leaving WNY than the Sabres. It's really hard to say what Golisano's thoughts are in regards to his long range plans for the Sabres. He was pretty vocal when he was buying the team that he considered the team being in Buffalo a "quality of life" sort of community asset and that he was buying the team pretty much as a community service. He also stated that he'd like to see others enter the ownership group, but to date I haven't seen any movement on that front. He definitely enjoys watching the Sabres now even though he's new to the sport. Maybe he's enjoying the fact that he's the "only" owner. I am pretty much taking him at his word for now that he will try to keep the team competitive, that he isn't interested in huge profits, he just won't accept huge losses, and that as revenues go up he will increase payroll. As many of you have written, that is a definite "snakes chasing their own tails" issue. But until I have reasonable proof that he isn't living up to his past statements, I will take them at face value. He gives a LOT of money to charities in the Rochester area, maybe this is his way of providing "charity" to the rest of WNY. Finally, if the Sabres maintain their ST base in the 13,000 range, then they only need to sell 5,696 tickets each game for a sellout (233,536 tickets over 41 games). There are ~1.2 MM people in Erie and Niagara county. I'd imagine that there are close to that, if not more between Hamilton and Fort Erie, and probably close to 1MM in the Greater Ra-cha-cha area. If everybody in that region that likes hockey tries to go to just 1 game every 4 years, the Sabres will be sold out forever. I'm not trying to spend other people's money and would never suggest that people that can't afford to go attend games, but I don't think an average fan's average attendance at 1 game every 4 years will destroy the kid's college fund. Sorry for the rambling post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrjsbu96 Posted July 25, 2006 Report Share Posted July 25, 2006 I'm not sure the local economy is that much of an issue. Buffalonians may make less than residents of many other NHL cities, but when actual interest in hockey is figured into the equation, the Sabres' yearly take from gate shouldn't be far off the numbers in Phoenix, Atlanta, Washington, and several other cities with higher average wages. No, it's not Colorado or Toronto. That's ok, though. It isn't Pittsburgh or Phoenix, either. Eleven - you and the other posts are correct, but I think the missing part of the equation is the corporate presence. WNY is an avid a hockey town as any other small or large-market city, but what most of them have over us is big corporations that buy up the lower-bowl, more expensive tickets and also the suites. That is money that gives the organization upfront cash. Even in the most dire seasons that the Rangers, as an example, experienced recently the attendance was still almost 18K each night, once again b/c of how much big companies use them for clients, etc. Unfortunately, Buffalo can not compete with that.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted July 25, 2006 Report Share Posted July 25, 2006 mrjsbu, isn't there another way to explain the level of corporate and business support for the Sabres besides the lack of Fortune 500 companies? Could it not go back to the product the Sabres have put on the ice, ineffective marketing and/or poor sales attempts when approaching the business community? Let's not forget that businesses don't look at a sports team as a charitable cause. The relationship has to make sense for them. And it will make more sense if the team wins, the arena is sold out, ratings are high, people are buying programs and in general there's buzz about the team in the community. Again, I'd like to see the braintrust at the Sabres forget all the old assumptions about this market. Build it, and they will come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmwolf21 Posted July 25, 2006 Report Share Posted July 25, 2006 You're right about the product on the ice going hand-in-hand with corporate sponsorship and ticket sales, but what happens when the club does put a winning product on the ice year after year? That's when having Fortune 500 companies as sponsors helps big time, as increased sponsorship dollars gives the team a bigger revenue stream than just raising ticket prices. A larger sponsorship revenue means the team has more money to put back into payroll, without pricing your fanbase out of the arena. I guess my point is, that if the economy was better in WNY, and there was a stronger corporate presence with largercompanies in WNY, then the team woulnd't be having small-market complaints and would be able to spend relatively close to the cap (without reaching in TG's pocket, past the stolen sugar packets.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrjsbu96 Posted July 25, 2006 Report Share Posted July 25, 2006 mrjsbu, isn't there another way to explain the level of corporate and business support for the Sabres besides the lack of Fortune 500 companies? Could it not go back to the product the Sabres have put on the ice, ineffective marketing and/or poor sales attempts when approaching the business community? Let's not forget that businesses don't look at a sports team as a charitable cause. The relationship has to make sense for them. And it will make more sense if the team wins, the arena is sold out, ratings are high, people are buying programs and in general there's buzz about the team in the community. Again, I'd like to see the braintrust at the Sabres forget all the old assumptions about this market. Build it, and they will come. I honestly don't think to the degree of your point. As I said, the Rangers are an example. Until last year, they have pretty much sucked since they won the Cup. I guess the argument could be made that even though they sucked they had "name" players? Corporations buy tickets to go smooze, get a client close to the glass, and make a sale. There is a catch 22 to this in that while they are buying up seats, they also show up towards the end of the first, and beat the traffic by leaving at the start of the third. I would bet 1/2 of them don't even know about what happened in the game.... I think I read in another post of yours that you believe ticket prices can rise and while I have not lived back in WNY in 6 years, I don't believe the economy can afford it (winner or not) Whether or not the city deserves a team is obviously the debate. I believe you would rather have an AHL team, whereas I would rather see this team succeed AKA Minny Twins, Oakland A's. As a Yankee fan for 25 years I almost have grown to dislike how they operate and can appreciate a team like what the Sabres did this past year (homegrown, soup-to-nuts organizational model) than throwing absurd money at players b/c the market dictates. No matter what way you cut it, I don't envy the position Darcy is in b/c there is no easy answer... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmwolf21 Posted July 25, 2006 Report Share Posted July 25, 2006 Corporations buy tickets, sponsorships, and more importantly, the cash-cow luxury suites. Ticket prices are what they are, but if there is a strong corporate presence in a region, the franchise can charge higher rates for sponsorship, in-arena advertising and for the luxury suites. That is where the lion's share of local revenue comes from (outside local TV contracts.) mrjsbu, you are correct that Darcy is in an unenviable position here - guess he'll also have to resort to stealing sugar packets to make it work in Buffalo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted July 25, 2006 Author Report Share Posted July 25, 2006 Corporations buy tickets, sponsorships, and more importantly, the cash-cow luxury suites. Ticket prices are what they are, but if there is a strong corporate presence in a region, the franchise can charge higher rates for sponsorship, in-arena advertising and for the luxury suites. That is where the lion's share of local revenue comes from (outside local TV contracts.) mrjsbu, you are correct that Darcy is in an unenviable position here - guess he'll also have to resort to stealing sugar packets to make it work in Buffalo. I think some of this is offset by local interest in hockey as compared to other markets too. A Southwest Airlines ad (for example) that runs during a Sabres game on MSG is seen by many, many more households than the same ad broadcast during a Carolina game on whatever channel carries them, and Southwest should be paying more for the ad--which in turn should trickle down to the Sabres through its MSG contract--if things are done properly. Same goes for national advertisers on radio. When the interest in hockey is factored in, the Sabres should be close to the national average in media revenue. If not, then that part of the business plan needs attention. With respect to local advertisers, it's an easy argument that a car dealer or collision shop benefits much more from its association with the Sabres in Buffalo than would a similar business in a "NASCAR NHL" city. I don't know that being the official hot dog of the Atlanta Thrashers means much, but Wardynski's makes money off of the Sabres affiliation. These relationships should be yielding income comparable to the league average as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.