12/21/24
September 30, 2005
St. Louis Blues sold for 50% more than 1999 market value.: The purchase price for the Blues is particularly noteworthy since the club lost a league-high $47 million in 2003-04, its last year of operation. [via]
I just hope this isn't the start of something negative in the NHL Nah, the negativity in the NHL started last September.
posted by MeatSaber at 09:48 AM on September 30, 2005
Yeah -so who's buying for this much and why? If you're the NHL this is absolutely good news. Baffling, but good.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 09:56 AM on September 30, 2005
Negative? I don't follow. 6 years = 50% return on a $100m investment? Sure the Lauries are selling, but I don't see how that translates to league-wide negativity. Especially considering the buyer, who is familiar with pro sport and the profit margins that come along with it. I get the impression NHL franchises are looked upon as money makers. Not that I understand where that impression comes from, given the league-wide losses that you always hear about.
posted by garfield at 10:02 AM on September 30, 2005
The argument from the Players Union is that the owners have not lost nearly as much as they claim they have - are these losses as in "It took me $100 mil to field a team, and took in only $75 mil" or "I expected to make $150 mil in profits, but only made $75 mil - so therefore, I lost $75 mil"???? Being from Boston, where a $30 seat is WAY up high, in the corners....and still selling out the majority of games....one wonders just how much a team could actually "lose"
posted by sinisterfoot at 10:37 AM on September 30, 2005
Being from Boston, where a $30 seat is WAY up high, in the corners Damn. The Stars have never had a problem selling tickets in the past, but they're offering $10 cheap seats this year. w00t!
posted by Ufez Jones at 10:53 AM on September 30, 2005
$10 in Boston will get you a small bag of popcorn, and one single ply tissue to plug your nose from bleeding due to the elevation change to get to your seat....
posted by sinisterfoot at 11:04 AM on September 30, 2005
One of the operations manager here in Detroit, when asked if the Wings were going to reduce ticket prices due to the significantly reduced payroll, stated that "this is Hockeytown, the fans are lucky that were not raising them!" $10.00 cheap seats, (doing my best Michael Palin/Life of Brian imitation), ooooh how I dream of $10.00 cheap seats! In defense though of Mr. MacLean though, we do still carry alot of financial baggage from our past.
posted by RedStrike at 11:11 AM on September 30, 2005
I lived in St Louis during the "Cup years" long ago, during the "move down-the seats are open years" in the early eighties and the "How did you get tickets to Brett Hull's hat trick years?" in the early/middle nineties. I was a season ticket holder for over 8 years when they still played in the Checkerdome/Arena; a place made for old time hockey. You could scream yourself silly, abuse the air conditioning vents in the upper sections, throw stuff and actually hit the ice, and wait in line for 20 minutes to urinate. GOD, it was glorious... Then came the Savis Center, with it's sterile, almost quiet nature, steeped in estetics and modernism. Plenty of concessions, lavatories, great views, and security, just waiting to eject you. Still, however, the St Louis hockey fans came in droves. When I wasn't willing to accept a 195% increase in the price of my season tickets, I was sent a letter from a copier stating that my request for a partial season package was denied due to excessive demand for my seats. Gee, I wonder whose signature was at the bottom of the letter? Could it have been Mr Laurie's? If he lost money, I cannot accept it, regardless of TV revenues. That place is full 98% of the time. They have a local contract with both Fox Sports and a local WB affiliate (Channel 11) that shows over 30 games a year, mainly becasue the Blues know that there will that many sellouts in a 20,000 seat stadium EVERY year. If Bill is claiming a loss, he can live with it...he married the right woman.
posted by stupidhockeyfan69 at 11:35 AM on September 30, 2005
I can see Garfield's point, from a business stand point the sale makes sense. In 6 years Laurie made a $50 million dollar profit on a $96 million investment. My only question is though, if the new NHL agreement is supposed to increase the amount of money the owners have by reducing player salaries, why would Laurie sell now? His investment should continue to grow. Unless he realizes that hockey's popularity has fallen off and even with the lower salaries, they are still going to lose money"? I don't know; it makes sense but at the same time it doesn't.
posted by mcstan13 at 11:45 AM on September 30, 2005
Just some quick math here... $20,500,000.00 = 41 games @ $25.00 per seat (which, at least in Boston, doesn't even GET YOU IN THE RINK) in JUST TICKETS ALONE... Not included: Parking, Merchandising, TV contracts, OR Concessions Now - how in the hell can these owners be claiming all the losses that they do. WE SEE THE GAMES....WE SEE THE SEATS BEING FILLED MOST OF THE TIME....WE SEE THE $10 BAGS OF POPCORN SCATTERED ON THE FLOOR AFTER THE GAME.....WE PAY THE $40 PARKING TO SEE OUR TEAM PLAY..... Lost revenue my ass......
posted by sinisterfoot at 12:24 PM on September 30, 2005
OH YEAH - numbers were based 20,000 seat arena...
posted by sinisterfoot at 12:25 PM on September 30, 2005
The Lauries got out because what they really wanted all along was an NBA franchise, something the NBA wasn't willing to grant. I believe they also got tired of taking the heat for spending money recklessly while not producing. St. Louis Post-Dispatch and The Sporting News puckhead (and all-around good guy) Jeff Gordon has this to say about Checketts and the future of the Blues.
posted by wfrazerjr at 12:38 PM on September 30, 2005
I live in St.Louis, And, I'm a Blues, Cardinal, and Rams fan. All that's in the paper about the Blues is about this Dave Checketts guy. I know he was involved with the Utah Jazz, the New York Nicks and the New York Rangers. But, what I haven't heard about was what type of guy he is. By that I mean, is he about putting a decent team on the ice or is he going to be another football Cardinal/Bill Bidwill guy (St.Louis football fans know what I mean). Anyway, maybe some of you guys in the New York area can shed some light on this for me. Help me out here, thanks
posted by jec34817 at 12:43 PM on September 30, 2005
The Checkerdome In StLouis sounds like the old Chicago Stadium. I aged many a minute in the urinal line. I thought "Dollar Bill Wirtz" was the loudest crier about losing money with his Blackhawks. But when you have a lot you must make more and screw the dumb fans who contnue to pay ridiculous prices.
posted by Richie Bee at 01:45 PM on September 30, 2005
$10 in Boston will get you a small bag of popcorn, and one single ply tissue to plug your nose from bleeding due to the elevation change to get to your seat.... Iknow what you mean, New England sucks with prices of anything. I go ot yankees games, and theyre rediclous. Maybe the fans should protest the prices.... What else can we do?
posted by redsoxrgay at 02:31 PM on September 30, 2005
The Lauries got out because what they really wanted all along was an NBA franchise That's the story in a nutshell. What they really wanted when they bought the Blues was the lease on the Savvis Center. When the league blocked their purchase of the Vancouver Grizzlies, and they couldn't get an expansion franchise the Lauries lost interest in keeping the Savvis Center. They have always been about basketball (witness the Paige Dome fiasco at Mizzou).
posted by Bury Bonds at 02:55 PM on September 30, 2005
I think Checketts knows what he's doing after all these years running teams and being in the NBA front office. Just look at how well he's done with the MLS franchise in the first year--okay they didn't make the playoffs but the got quality players, winning a fan base, and have a soccer-specific stadium in the works. No doubt he can be successful running the Blues. Why the Lauries would sell now, that's tougher for me to see although one idea not mentioned here yet is that Checketts is buddies with the Commish and if Dave said to him that StL is the most attractive club for him to buy then I'd expect a little armtwisting and carrot dangling to result.
posted by billsaysthis at 03:20 PM on September 30, 2005
My thought is that Checketts is also viewing the NBA angle. With his many NBA connections thru the Knicks & the Jazz, he may be able to do what the Lauries could not in St. Louis. Also, the St. Louis Post Dispatch is reporting today that the sale of the Blues is by no means complete. Checketts has been given exclusive bargaining rights for the next 30 days, during which time they will try to finalize the purchase price and other details.
posted by Bury Bonds at 04:00 PM on September 30, 2005
he may be able to do what the Lauries could not in St. Louis Interesting. I could see that as a motivation, no doubt. So basically, all this great news about NHL franchise valuation is really a mirage concealing a bid to get NBA ball to St.Louis. Sounds about right, actually.
posted by garfield at 04:25 PM on September 30, 2005
$10 in Boston will get you a small bag of popcorn, and one single ply tissue to plug your nose from bleeding due to the elevation change to get to your seat.... The Bruins have $10.00 and $19.00 tickets too, you knuckleheads. Quit yer bitchin'!
posted by Samsonov14 at 05:33 PM on September 30, 2005
THE $40 PARKING TO SEE OUR TEAM PLAY..... Just curious, do you guys really pay $40 to park?? Thats outrageous
posted by jojomfd1 at 07:14 PM on September 30, 2005
Maybe at Fenway on game day. Last time I parked at the Fleet Center it was $25. Could be $40 now, but only if you're parking in the building, which is dense. I only parked there because we had free parking with the tickets.
posted by yerfatma at 07:33 PM on September 30, 2005
Just wondering if it was that much more there. Here in Cleveland, it is $15-$20 and the is the most. That's right across the street.
posted by jojomfd1 at 07:38 PM on September 30, 2005
I am not sure if this is a good or bad sign for the Blues or hockey in general. The Lauries own alot in Missouri and it makes me wonder why the would want to get out from under the Blues, especially at time when it appears that the teams should be making more money than ever. The Lauries are a strange family so who knows what the reasoning is for selling, but the climate in hockey has taken a major downturn as of late, I just hope this isn't the start of something negative in the NHL.