Sign in to follow this  
WhalerChad

Islanders looking at new arena next to Belmont Park

Recommended Posts

Airports, you horse's a$$, are used by EVERYONE. A person may never step foot in an arena for anything in their lives, but they'll go to the airport. To compare the two is simply idiotic, even by your legendary standards.

 

Once again...There were 5 arenas in the NYC metro area. One of them recently closed because there weren't enough events outside of pro sports to justify keeping the arena open. How opening another one is going to magically create enough events to keep all 5 of them open and with enough events to justify staying open is anyone's guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

top cat wrote:

> It has to do with another of your moronic posts. " Too many arenas in

> greater NYC. Connect the Dots "DOT HEAD"

 

Oh Mark is totally right about that my sides hurt from them thinking a fifth arena is the answer. LOL. Yes they'll be booking Globetrotters and Monster Trucks for two months.

 

Remember within an hour of Hartford the population is over 3.1M.

 

Don't see how the Islanders can p***** up a chance to have their own market for the first time in their illustrious career.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MarkH2919 wrote:

> "Hockey and basketball teams have traditionally shared arenas, but

> that is starting to change."

>

> Not sure about that.

 

I'm not absolutely sure about it either, but the economics of running a team these days seems to require that the team controls all or most of the revenue streams from "their" arena. A team can't do that in a shared arena. Yes, most arenas are currently shared in markets that have both an NBA and NHL team. But as the current leases run out, more and more teams will demand their own building. That's what happened with football and baseball. It's a long, slow process that I think we are just seeing the beginning of.

>

 

Whalevolution wrote:

>

> It's going to take at least 2-3 seasons to build a new arena. The Islanders have

> no where to play after next season and neither do the Coyotes. Both- again!

 

The Islanders could play at N*****au. The Coyotes can continue to play at GRA on a year-to-year basis. It's unlikely they would do this unless they are promised a new arena in Arizona. If they don't they will be loading up the moving vans, possibly this summer, rather than play a lame-duck season in Glendale.

 

>Don't see how the Islanders can p***** up a chance to have their own market for the first time in their illustrious career.

 

They are tied to NY by a lucrative TV contract. They wouldn't get anything close to that in Hartford.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt the NHL will let a team play in a building where the occupancy is lower than the team's current attendance avg. plus they embarr*****ment of going back to where they just left. Even if for three seasons trying to sell tickets to an area the team just stuffed.

 

The Coyotes cant make money in Glendale. Staying there would be the same as current situation with the XL. Sooner or later your going to need to do something to make money instead of pissing it away.

 

And tv market of 3.1M ain't NY but it ain't shabby either. As big as Raleigh, Nashville, Salt Lake, and Buffalo. All major league cities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"And tv market of 3.1M ain't NY but it ain't shabby either. As big as Raleigh, Nashville, Salt Lake, and Buffalo. All major league cities."

 

Here's a question...what are the NY TV ratings for Islander games? I can't imagine they're very high.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue that is unfortunate with the Islanders is the new coliseum was built too quick without expanding it to be a 21st century hockey venue with a suite level. If they could have somehow could have figured out a way to knock down the coliseum for that mall or knock it down for got and rebuild a new venue on long island it would have made things better for this situation.

 

But due to them rushing the new coliseum to just hold concerts (which the area needed many artists are booking big shows (roger waters, j cole, billy joel) in this venue for this summer and fall to not have to worry about conflicts with msg. But the fact they want to still build another arena shows the power of the TV money making people keep the isles in nyc. If they built another venue in the nyc area the venue that would suffer the most is the Prudential Center in Newark. Despite all these new arenas the barclays still gets many concerts and the nets and MSG is MSG. Now the new coliseum is still getting big named acts who can't book MSG due to other shows or sporting events. Anything on the wrong side of the GW bridge (from an arena not a stadium perspective) is bound to fail. They will find events for anything in the actual city north of the bridge/long island.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whalevolution wrote:

> I doubt the NHL will let a team play in a building where the occupancy is

> lower than the team's current attendance avg. plus they embarr*****ment of

> going back to where they just left. Even if for three seasons trying to

> sell tickets to an area the team just stuffed.

 

N*****au can add 3,000 seats to bring it up to 16,000. As far as being embarr*****ed, if the NHL isn't embarr*****ed about the Coyotes, they won't be embarr*****ed about anything. NVMC went through a modernization, like people want for the XL Center. And Barclay's has not worked out, so going back to N*****au, and their fan base makes more sense than any other option for the Isles.

>

> The Coyotes cant make money in Glendale. Staying there would be the same as

> current situation with the XL. Sooner or later your going to need to do

> something to make money instead of pissing it away.

 

That's why they are asking for another new taxpayer-**nded arena in Arizona. And that's why I said that if they don't get it they will likely move sooner rather than later. Maybe this year.

 

MarkH2919 wrote:

> "And tv market of 3.1M ain't NY but it ain't shabby either. As big as Raleigh, Nashville,

> Salt Lake, and Buffalo. All major league cities."

>

> Here's a question...what are the NY TV ratings for Islander games? I can't imagine

> they're very high.

 

In this case, ratings don't matter. The Islanders have a long term deal, at an absurdly high rate. I've read that it's $30 million/yr and runs for another 17 years.

They won't get that in Hartford or anywhere else. They wouldn't get that again in NY if it ran out today. But while it's in place, the Isles are staying in NY.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MarkH2919 wrote:

> Here's a question...what are the NY TV ratings for Islander games? I can't

> imagine they're very high.

Local TV ratings for the Islanders are low but that is the case in all huge markets like NY and LA. When your talking that many people the percentage watching sports is always lower. Smaller markets like Buffalo traditionally have way higher local ratings. That being said big markets get higher dollar TV deals even though the ratings are lower percentage wise. It wouldn't matter if only 5 people were watching the Islanders on one TV anyways, they get paid the amount they agreed to in 1984.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Belmont Park should be the ideal location for the Islanders. Very near Queens yet in suburbia on Long Island. If I still lived in the Hartford area I would have chosen the Islanders as my NHL ream. Too bad it's taken so long to become competitive and to find a new suitable location. Yup markie boy another sport's arena in Greater NYC. Should be an easy ride from Hartford. I used to often make the trip to Flushing for the Mets. I *****ume it would be as easy or maybe easier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Monizzle made my point for me a while back, too bad you dummies can't read.

 

"If they built another venue in the nyc area the venue that would suffer the most is the Prudential Center in Newark"

 

Thank you Monizzle. I said 5 arenas in the NYC area is one too many. I was scoffed at by most people. Not you. You're correct. And remember, it's not like the Devils are packing them in there. They thought that moving from the Meadowlands to a new arena in Newark would help them, truth is...it hasn't.

 

per hockeydb.com

 

This is their 10th year at Prudential Center. So far, they have averaged 15,488/game in their 10 years there (Regular season)

 

The 10 prior years, playing at the Meadowlands, they averaged 15,546/game. So needless to say, the change has been very minimal, and in the wrong direction.

 

Since the Devils run the building, and since the Devils get a cut of every event in the building...a new arena on the Island would hurt them...and they could be the ones that end up eventually relocating...it's not like they make buckets of money as it is.

 

Now...before the idiots like TC and Wolfie get their panties in a bunch, let me just say (again) I don't think the Islanders are moving out of NYC. And I don't think the Devils are going anywhere anytime soon either. But I will continue to say 5 major league sports arenas in the NYC metro area is one too many.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You may be right that another arena would be too much, but it's not up to you to decide. The arenas will compete, like any other businesses, and there will be winners and losers. This proposed arena would be privately financed, so let the investors take the risk if they choose to. The big point here is that the Islanders will be looking for a venue that can make money for the team. If they can have that in N*****au, it would make sense to go back there. If not, they will want a new building where they get all the control and all the revenue.

 

As I said previously, we are starting to see teams wanting or needing their own arenas so they don't have to share revenue streams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"You may be right that another arena would be too much, but it's not up to you to decide"

 

It's not up to me to decide, but it's already been proven to be correct. So unless the number of family events, concerts, etc. suddenly increases to where all 5 arenas get a piece...I think one will eventually go under in time. Now, I will not begin to guess which one will go.

 

"The big point here is that the Islanders will be looking for a venue that can make money for the team. If they can have that in N*****au, it would make sense to go back there. If not, they will want a new building where they get all the control and all the revenue."

 

And what if they don't? What if they can't go back to N*****au? What if the investors decide ultimately that a 5th arena in NYC is not worth the investment? As has been said before, it's asking a lot to book oh....100-125 other dates in addition to the roughly 45 dates the Islanders would take up in a new arena. Maybe something will happen with one of the investors portfolios that would change the landscape...a lot of things can happen to change things...quickly...things that are not necessarily in anybody's control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "What ifs" are everywhere. But if the Islanders can't make it at N*****au long term, a new arena would make sense if it is privately built. They would likely do well attracting events besides hockey games at a brand new building. It's the other venues that would lose business, like N*****au and Newark. That's the free market.

 

A new arena will not be ready soon in any case. I don't see any option besides N*****au for the Islanders after next season. They could play there for two or three years while a new arena is built.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And again, what if it can't be built with private money for one reason or another? See...you (and others) just automatically *****ume it's going to be done...but it doesn't always work that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MarkH2919 wrote:

> So you're just automatically *****uming that either (a) a new building will

> be built or (b) they can go back to N*****au.

>

> Wow. OK. :roll:

 

I'm *****uming that the Islanders aren't leaving New York. They are tied to NYC or LI by their insanely big TV deal, which they won't come close to getting anywhere else. The people who run Barclay's also run N*****au. They've said they can add 3,000 more seats to the Coliseum to satisfy the NHL. There are currently three buildings in NYC and LI that can house a hockey team, Barclay's, MSG, and N*****au. They are leaving Barclay's, and I can't imagine them moving to MSG along with the Rangers and Knicks. That leaves only N*****au. A new building would be a few years down the road, if it gets built at all.

 

Or are you *****uming that the Isles will walk away from the TV money and their fan base by moving out of state? If so, where? Hartford? As you and others have said, that's not at all likely. Hartford isn't ready to take the Islanders or any other team. Quebec? They want to own a team and I'm not sure the Isles are for sale. Then there's the dreaded exchange rate to be dealt with. Seattle isn't ready either.

 

So yes, I'm *****uming the Islanders are going back to N*****au, at least temporarily. OK?

 

What is your theory?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's just it. I'm *****uming nothing, at least right at the moment, except for the fact they will leave Barclays as soon as they possibly can. That might not be until the new arena is done....IF the new arena is done.

 

By the way, who said N*****au could be renovated to 16,000? If that's the case, why didn't they renovate it to seat 16,000 from the start and just bring the Isles back?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MarkH2919 wrote:

> That's just it. I'm *****uming nothing, at least right at the moment, except

> for the fact they will leave Barclays as soon as they possibly can. That

> might not be until the new arena is done....IF the new arena is done.

 

My understanding is that the Islanders will play one more season at Barclay's. Remember, it's not the team that wants to move out, it's the arena that wants them out. They are paying the team to be there, and they are losing money on the deal.

>

> By the way, who said N*****au could be renovated to 16,000? If that's the

> case, why didn't they renovate it to seat 16,000 from the start and just

> bring the Isles back?

 

I read that to get the team to move, the folks who run both Barclays and N*****au have offered to add capacity to the Coliseum. When they originally planned the renovations in N*****au, they didn't expect the Islanders to return. They expected things to work out at Barclays. So they rebuilt the Coliseum mainly for concerts and maybe a minor league team. So 13,000 would have been enough. I'm sure those extra seats won't be great, but it would be acceptable for the NHL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"My understanding is that the Islanders will play one more season at Barclay's. Remember, it's not the team that wants to move out, it's the arena that wants them out. They are paying the team to be there, and they are losing money on the deal."

 

Well, according to this article from Bloomberg...

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-01-30/brooklyn-s-barclays-center-said-to-be-dumping-the-islanders

 

The Islanders can opt out after the 2017/18 season. The arena can't "kick them out" until after 2018/19. Now...according to what I have read, Barclays Center pays the Islanders a good sum of money to play there....just like the Islanders wouldn't leave NYC because of their TV deal, why would they leave Barclays Center (and money on the table)????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hadn't seen that before, but it really doesn't change things much. It just adds a year to the timeline. It's still unlikely that a new arena would be ready for the Islanders when they leave Barclays. That still leaves no place for them to go other than N*****au.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"That still leaves no place for them to go other than N*****au"

 

If (a) the building can be expanded to hold 16,000 or so seats

if (b) the building has the revenue streams that other NHL buildings have (or will have)

 

Again, there's nothing *****ured at this point, other than they're leaving Barclays Center in 1 or 2 seasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just heard Islanders owners will be meeting with Malloy this week.

 

I'm sure it's a weighing options moment for the Isles but they at least are taking Hartford seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Malloy needs to take advantage of this opportunity and really pitch Hartford as a destination for them, and how the Islanders that they will have a whole market to themselves!!!!

 

 

Whalevolution wrote:

> Just heard Islanders owners will be meeting with Malloy this week.

>

> I'm sure it's a weighing options moment for the Isles but they at least are

> taking Hartford seriously.

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
Sign in to follow this