General Hockey Talk - Injuries, signings, factoids + other news from around the league

Flo The Action wrote:

Ev wrote:This is such a fantastic move for the league. Gary Bergman is such a great commissioner because he just gets it. This is a huge opportunity to be the first team in Vegas and they will make a boatload of money. Gambling is king.

I don't think they will lose money. There's too much of it around. But will they actually have full capacity crowds, butts in seat at the arena? I don't Cussing think so. Once the novelty runs out they will be tickets bought and served as giveaways.

Flo The Action wrote:Nothing also said about the players getting heavy gambling addictions, the coke and the Hookers. It's sin city for a reason. Whatch a few young players throw their lives away because they will be playing there.

Flo The Action wrote:

Ev wrote:

wprager wrote:

Ev wrote:Fully agree with Vegas over Quebec for now. Quebec is a bad location and a city nobody really even knows about. Vegas will bring in a LOT more revenue and it's a lot more of a destination.

They will sell a lot of tickets (at least initially) but they will have trouble filling the seats.  "Congratulations on your winning streak!  Here's a pair of tickets to the game that starts in an hour.  Of course if you want to continue your hot streak, here's a free drink from our scantily-dressed waitress."

I don't see what you mean about Quebec being a bad location and a city no-one knows about.  They had a team and the only reason they lost it was because the arena was too small and the loonie too low.  They already have a new arena and the dollar is a lot closer to 80 cents than 70 (let alone 60).  

I thought it was Quebecor that cooled off, not the NHL.  Mulroney was the one who came out and mentioned the effects of the lower dollar.  Of course the loonie has recovered 6-7 cents since that time, but perhaps he knows that it will either recover some more or drop down again.  

The American fanbase is more important than Canada. Americans don't really know about Quebec compared to a city like Vegas. I don't think it matters that they fill the seats, as long as they sell them.

Vegas is a much better market than Quebec. Easy decision. There's nothing else to do in Quebec and Quebec in general is a bad province to do business in

Wouldn't that make it a hot ticket in extention because there isn't much to do in Quebec? Sceptical go watch hockey? I mean when a city sells out junior games of over 10000 people you think they could easily get an NHL full capacity.

Also I find it comical that one puts Quebec City down that way as I'm familiar with Quebec enough to say that whatever you say about that city would equally apply to Ottawa. Both are so similar it's not even funny. If hockey cN survive in Ottawa so can it survive in QC. Especially with much deeper pocket owners like videotron. Who will own the TV deal.

Ev wrote:

Flo The Action wrote:Nothing also said about the players getting heavy gambling addictions, the coke and the Hookers. It's sin city for a reason. Whatch a few young players throw their lives away because they will be playing there.

Any city has all of this. It's literally no different anywhere else now.

Ev wrote:

Flo The Action wrote:

Ev wrote:

wprager wrote:

Ev wrote:Fully agree with Vegas over Quebec for now. Quebec is a bad location and a city nobody really even knows about. Vegas will bring in a LOT more revenue and it's a lot more of a destination.

They will sell a lot of tickets (at least initially) but they will have trouble filling the seats.  "Congratulations on your winning streak!  Here's a pair of tickets to the game that starts in an hour.  Of course if you want to continue your hot streak, here's a free drink from our scantily-dressed waitress."

I don't see what you mean about Quebec being a bad location and a city no-one knows about.  They had a team and the only reason they lost it was because the arena was too small and the loonie too low.  They already have a new arena and the dollar is a lot closer to 80 cents than 70 (let alone 60).  

I thought it was Quebecor that cooled off, not the NHL.  Mulroney was the one who came out and mentioned the effects of the lower dollar.  Of course the loonie has recovered 6-7 cents since that time, but perhaps he knows that it will either recover some more or drop down again.  

The American fanbase is more important than Canada. Americans don't really know about Quebec compared to a city like Vegas. I don't think it matters that they fill the seats, as long as they sell them.

Vegas is a much better market than Quebec. Easy decision. There's nothing else to do in Quebec and Quebec in general is a bad province to do business in

Wouldn't that make it a hot ticket in extention because there isn't much to do in Quebec? Sceptical go watch hockey? I mean when a city sells out junior games of over 10000 people you think they could easily get an NHL full capacity.

Also I find it comical that one puts Quebec City down that way as I'm familiar with Quebec enough to say that whatever you say about that city would equally apply to Ottawa. Both are so similar it's not even funny. If hockey cN survive in Ottawa so can it survive in QC. Especially with much deeper pocket owners like videotron. Who will own the TV deal.

Ottawa is a much better market because it's not in the province of Quebec which is like living in a different country

Flo The Action wrote:

Ev wrote:

Flo The Action wrote:Nothing also said about the players getting heavy gambling addictions, the coke and the Hookers. It's sin city for a reason. Whatch a few young players throw their lives away because they will be playing there.

Any city has all of this. It's literally no different anywhere else now.

I don't know you but I imagine you have been to Vegas.  You just strike me as a vegas type of guy. I'm not but I've been. It is not the same as everywhere else. There is literally very little to do when you are there. Apart from the straight obvious. A large part of the population is transient and moves in and out in reasons of the work. It's all about the gambling,  the drugs and excess and the women. Throw a bunch of early 20's milionaires in there and Dung will go all kinds of ways.  It won't be funny.

Flo The Action wrote:

Ev wrote:

Flo The Action wrote:

Ev wrote:

wprager wrote:

Ev wrote:Fully agree with Vegas over Quebec for now. Quebec is a bad location and a city nobody really even knows about. Vegas will bring in a LOT more revenue and it's a lot more of a destination.

They will sell a lot of tickets (at least initially) but they will have trouble filling the seats.  "Congratulations on your winning streak!  Here's a pair of tickets to the game that starts in an hour.  Of course if you want to continue your hot streak, here's a free drink from our scantily-dressed waitress."

I don't see what you mean about Quebec being a bad location and a city no-one knows about.  They had a team and the only reason they lost it was because the arena was too small and the loonie too low.  They already have a new arena and the dollar is a lot closer to 80 cents than 70 (let alone 60).  

I thought it was Quebecor that cooled off, not the NHL.  Mulroney was the one who came out and mentioned the effects of the lower dollar.  Of course the loonie has recovered 6-7 cents since that time, but perhaps he knows that it will either recover some more or drop down again.  

The American fanbase is more important than Canada. Americans don't really know about Quebec compared to a city like Vegas. I don't think it matters that they fill the seats, as long as they sell them.

Vegas is a much better market than Quebec. Easy decision. There's nothing else to do in Quebec and Quebec in general is a bad province to do business in

Wouldn't that make it a hot ticket in extention because there isn't much to do in Quebec? Sceptical go watch hockey? I mean when a city sells out junior games of over 10000 people you think they could easily get an NHL full capacity.

Also I find it comical that one puts Quebec City down that way as I'm familiar with Quebec enough to say that whatever you say about that city would equally apply to Ottawa. Both are so similar it's not even funny. If hockey cN survive in Ottawa so can it survive in QC. Especially with much deeper pocket owners like videotron. Who will own the TV deal.

Ottawa is a much better market because it's not in the province of Quebec which is like living in a different country

The only thing that's different is the tax rate. Actually the market is even more prime for pro sports as it doesn't have any other pro team the way Ottawa has. Is a government town with wealthy population. It's not the QC of 20 years ago.  And they are hungry for hockey.

Ev wrote:

Flo The Action wrote:

Ev wrote:

Flo The Action wrote:Nothing also said about the players getting heavy gambling addictions, the coke and the Hookers. It's sin city for a reason. Whatch a few young players throw their lives away because they will be playing there.

Any city has all of this. It's literally no different anywhere else now.

I don't know you but I imagine you have been to Vegas.  You just strike me as a vegas type of guy. I'm not but I've been. It is not the same as everywhere else. There is literally very little to do when you are there. Apart from the straight obvious. A large part of the population is transient and moves in and out in reasons of the work. It's all about the gambling,  the drugs and excess and the women. Throw a bunch of early 20's milionaires in there and Dung will go all kinds of ways.  It won't be funny.

this is really no different than a place like LA. Millionaires can do anything in ANY city. It's an irrelevant point in 2016 and there's sports like baseball already in Vegas that have worked. The players will be living on the outskirts and suburbs anyway. Just like they do in a place like Detroit.

wprager wrote:By the way, buyout window opens today.  Should see some action on the waiver wire.  Get ready, SD.  No, it never gets old.

spader wrote:Teravainen and Bickell to Carolina for a 2nd in '16 and a 3rd in '17.

Nicely done, Mr. Francis.

Flo The Action wrote:

spader wrote:Teravainen and Bickell to Carolina for a 2nd in '16 and a 3rd in '17.

Nicely done, Mr. Francis.

It's still a second and a third. I know they have the room to swallow bickell's contract but they might have been able to only pay a second. Minor details.

Open the flood gates!!!