2019 Attendance

Discussion in 'NLL News and Rumors' started by AFedyk, Dec 23, 2018.

  1. RockStar

    RockStar Well-Known Member

    Pretty much what I had figured for why the Leafs dont really want the Rock.

    I am nearly certain they dont want it at any price......because, as I have stated, if they did, they could make it impossible for Dawick to operate in Toronto and force him to sell or vacate the market.
     
  2. R.J

    R.J Guest

    Dawick has supposedly been losing on average over $200k a year, and I think it's only a matter of time before he sells. But, he loves the team, game, and League, so it's just a bit of a waiting game now I suppose. I've been told by someone within MLSE that they are interested, and had discussions in 2015-2016, but Dawick wasn't interested in selling. MLSE is just waiting for the inevitable now; hence why they haven't pushed out the Rock...

    Just an FYI, it costs around $50-75k a game to operate an arena larger than 16,000. From my understanding Dawick pays at least $1 million in rent to MLSE.
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2019
  3. R.J

    R.J Guest

    Ahh, the Daryl Katz way...
     
    Andrew GEA likes this.
  4. Rick716

    Rick716 Well-Known Member

    The league still suffers from lack of a TV contract. There’s just no mainstream exposure. Streaming and B/R Live is fine for the hardcore fans but many potential casual fans don’t even know the game exists because it’s not on TV in most cities. I know Philadelphia and Colorado have some sort of local or regional package, but that’s it. So we have little or no newspaper coverage, local news coverage, and no TV deal.

    I love the NLL and indoor lacrosse in general, but it’s unrealistic to ever expect to approach the popularity of the big four in the US. The popularity’s of MLS is actually a good model to follow. That level of success would be great. If not, the best we can hope for is really stability in each franchise and teams not losing money.
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2019
  5. R.J

    R.J Guest

    As much as I’m a fan of what Sakewicz is doing, his obsession with digital media brings him down IMO. Rabil somehow got NBCSports involved with the PLL, so why can’t Sakewicz do the same for the NLL ?

    Admittedly getting a tv contract in Canada maybe tricky as there’s really only two options. And, while lacrosse is growing in the U.S, it’s been stagnant in Canada for a long time now.
     
  6. liveone

    liveone Active Member

    When Sakiewicz was on Lax Classified a month or so ago, I submitted a question to Jumbo on Twitter about this. The intent kind of got lost, though, and it became just the generic "what about regular" TV question. I don't see how you grow beyond the current 13 markets without some sort of national coverage. TV may be dying, but it's not dead yet.

    I totally see what Sak means about the next generation, too. I have two teenage boys who watch everything on their phone or tablet. My kid will sit in front of the 70" smart tv and watch Netflix on his 5" phone for hours. They both watch everything NLL on youtube but neither has any idea what SportsCenter is. We can all sit here and complain about the direction the Commish is taking the league, but the truth is none of us are the demographic they are targeting.

    A local paper this weekend published a few quotes from him taken during the Rush game in which he opens the door to a a national TV deal for the first time since he took over:
    http://www.norwichbulletin.com/sports/20190106/nll-commissioner-upbeat-about-leagues-expansion-labor-issues

    "We're having conversations, but right now, we're getting to our audience on the digital platform."

    I'm thinking this was his strategy all along... back away from TV for a while a build a better product and you'll have them coming to you instead of begging ESPN/TSN for a few hours a year. Do this by expanding the league and get more high profile owners involved. Build a decent digital platform with REAL broadcasts and show that you can provide a quality product (not jumbotron feeds!). Suddenly they're in bed with Turner through B/R Live and just a step away from national coverage in TNT/TBS during the slow Winter and Spring. A good showing on B/R Live for a year could really blow things up for them.
     
  7. Rick716

    Rick716 Well-Known Member

    [QUOTE="liveone, post: 3858202, member: 118533I'm thinking this was his strategy all along... back away from TV for a while a build a better product and you'll have them coming to you instead of begging ESPN/TSN for a few hours a year. Do this by expanding the league and get more high profile owners involved. Build a decent digital platform with REAL broadcasts and show that you can provide a quality product (not jumbotron feeds!). Suddenly they're in bed with Turner through B/R Live and just a step away from national coverage in TNT/TBS during the slow Winter and Spring. A good showing on B/R Live for a year could really blow things up for them.[/QUOTE]

    This is actually quite interesting. Being in the Turner family might be an exciting avenue. They run NBA TV and the NBA website and have had a long history with basketball and baseball. Even though digital is the new frontier, a legit league should have both TV and digital. Every other league has TV plus the digital/streaming option for those that want a league or team pass option. The B/R broadcasts are really looking good, I think. Uniform graphics and pretty much flawless quality on the right equipment (I was aggravated week one trying to watch on my desktop, but since have had no issues using my Roku stick).

    Optics matter. Going to NY and Philadelphia is a good thing in terms of optics. As is going back to Vancouver. Even if you blocked out the entire upper bowl of Rogers Centre, it looks more professional to have a mostly full lower bowl, if they can do it. (You can't run games out of Langley, BC). Georgia needs work obviously.
     
  8. R.J

    R.J Guest

    There's no question that digital media is not only part of the present, but also the future. However, over 90% of homes in Canada and the U.S still have some form of tv. From my understanding it's pay/cable tv that is dying, but some people are going back to antennas.

    I pretty much only have tv for sports nowadays. If illegal streams didn't suck so much, and TSN Direct/Sportsnet Now weren't so over priced, I would have cut the cord a while ago. I also use kodi for certain shows, and to watch the odd movie.

    FWIW, the NLL signed a 3 year deal with BR Live, so hopefully it grows enough to get the big sports networks interested.
     
  9. Vin

    Vin Well-Known Member

    You know what sucks?

    In the USA, you can't even get TSN or Sportsnet by streaming. I looked into it and was willing to fork over the $$, but they are not available in the USA.



    I am just so sick and tired of broadcasters, leagues, nations, and their lawyers with their fʊcking contracts preventing free commerce and exchange of harmless information and entertainment.

    I am serious that this has alienated me as a consumer for any broadcast media of any form.

    In the USA, a smart ACLU-like lawyer ought to make the case that such broadcast restrictions and exclusive / black-out rights are both a violation of the First Amendment and a violation of the Commerce Clause in Article I, Section 8, Clause 3.

    The Congress shall have power
    ...
    If these international exclusions exist solely as a point of contract between entities, this both harms the consumer and is a violation of the Commerce Clause because only Congress has that power.
     
    Tom Wersderfer likes this.
  10. AmericanRockFan

    AmericanRockFan Well-Known Member

    I'm love to get SportsNet and TSN. Back in the day, I really wanted to get Much Music after it became Fuse in the USA.

    Now, off the record, you might be able to get SportsNet and TSN via Amazon Firestick if you know what you're doing ;)
     
  11. Vin

    Vin Well-Known Member

    MLSE and the Oilers may be sitting back because they want more data points.

    Right now, if you look at the attendance in the NLL, it is the NHL-owned teams (and Saskatchewan) that are at the top of attendance. (Although, it's still early in the season and SD is yet to play a home game.)

    These groups may be sitting back to see if it is going to work in Vancouver. If it does, then that pretty much illustrates that the only thing needed to make it succeed is the right ownership because, in every case in which a team's ownership transitioned from Mom&Pop to NHL, the team became more successful in the stands.

    As to MLSE, their case is distinct.

    Yes, they have no interest in the Rock now and that makes sense. They are getting money from Dawick now, but he is sinking which means that, at some point, he will have to sell or fold the Rock. In that case, MLSE is not getting the revenue from Rock dates anymore. However, the Rock will be available for sale at a reduced fee.... sort of a fire sale. At that point, MLSE will have a double interest in picking up the team. First, buying from Dawick is cheaper than expanding and they will want to make money with Rock dates in the arena.

    Another thing that I have not mentioned much recently is that the NHL owners always have in the back of their mind labor strife like the cancelled 2004-2005 season. By having ownership in another league and then growing that league, they have a back-up. Sure, right now, 9 home dates does not compensate for a loss of 41 NHL home dates, but it still helps. Furthermore, if the league is stable enough and its growth is fostered by the NHL owners, the NLL may transition to a full-time player league and the season may expand to 40 or more games. After all, if you are a profitable NHL owner, you'd be a more profitable NHL owner with two "NHL" (NHL + NLL) teams.
     
  12. AmericanRockFan

    AmericanRockFan Well-Known Member

    If worst comes to worst and Dawick does decide to fold one day, I think MLSE should take a close look and see which would be better financially - 9 Rock home games, or trying to find 9 other events to put in the arena on those days. Now, I know that concerts and such are easier to sellout than Rock games, but does anyone know just how much of that revenue that MLSE actually takes? Or do they just charge arena rent and keep concession money?
     
  13. Vin

    Vin Well-Known Member

    Yes, of course, MLSE would do that.

    The same could be said about any sports teams and their arenas.

    Why are sports teams good for an arena?

    3 big reasons:
    1. Concerts and tours get cancelled if there are issues with the band/singers. Other than the rare weather-related postponement or labor strife, sports dates don't get cancelled.
    2. Sports teams have essentially many more guaranteed dates and are predictable further in advance.
    3. Sports teams have season ticket holders.

    In business, profit is important of course. But, just as important is cost containment and, more so, predictability. The better you can predict your costs or future, the easier it is to make a profit. This is deeply instinctive to businesses.


    One other thing...

    As more and more NHL owners get involved, there will be more pressure on the NLL overall to "make the jump" to a league with full-time players and a longer schedule. Sure, 9 home dates is 9 home dates and 9 random concerts may be better. But, 40 home dates is better than 40 random concerts because you are not going to get 40 random sell-out concerts, some of which may get cancelled and have a wide-variety of needs because of the nature of the concert acts and their fans. The less variability, the better the prediction and cost containment.
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2019
  14. Dave S-C

    Dave S-C Well-Known Member

    There might be copyright issues (i.e. differences between Canada and USA) at the heart of this that prevent this.

    Back in late 2017, I was interviewed for a lacrosse documentary that appeared on Canadian pay TV station SuperChannel. When it was released for broadcast, it was only made available in Canada. I asked the film producer why was that - and the anser I got was it was due to copyright issues and some footage the producers had sourced permission via the CBC that was for broadcast in Canada only. Without removing that footage first, they could not broadcast the documentary outside of Canada.

    So, it's possible there are intellectual property copyright issues or licensing issues/costs that make Canadian media shy of broadcasting outside of Canada (and not actual government barriers). Could be a property thing or reimbursement thing at the corporate level.
     
  15. Vin

    Vin Well-Known Member

    ... which is all related to the bullshit I said.

    The bottom line is that I, as a consumer, is discriminated against because of my passport or location.

    There is nothing in the laws of physics that prevents me from consuming broadcast media any differently than anyone else. They only differences either lie in the availability of technology and all the legal horseshit.
     
  16. RockStar

    RockStar Well-Known Member

    A long time ago, Sportsnet only paid for regional telecast rights to the NLL.....so, despite the fact that I subscribed to Sportsnet West and Pacific, I couldn't watch Ravens or Roughnecks games......they were blacked out in Ontario.

    The reason they only had regional rights?

    Some jag-off at the NLL sold exclusive national TV rights to "The Score" *facepalm*.....I got the shttiest possible coverage of a handful of games that were NOT in Toronto, Vancouver, or Calgary.

    The "highlight" was the 2004 West finals - scoreboard feed, complete with the Score's stupid technicality where they were officially a "sports news station" so they had to keep cutting away from live action to bring you an unimportant update of some horseshtt event you didn't give a fcck about .....
     
  17. Vin

    Vin Well-Known Member

    You know, and this is exactly part of the problem.

    You need a goddam matrix to keep track of who's got what, where, when, and how often!

    The NLL should have a single broadcaster, period (*).
    That broadcaster then broadcasts all content - ALL content - created by the NLL.
    There are no blackouts or exclusions or whatever.
    The broadcaster can charge how much to charge (provided NLL agrees) and the broadcaster can use whatever media vectors to broadcast (provided NLL agrees).
    The broadcasts may be limited to device types, but they need to be independent of device maker/service provider/operating system and available to all of them.

    The bottom line for the fan is:
    I want everything.
    I want one broadcaster to get it from.
    I don't need special technology to consume content.
    I pay this much.
    That's it.​

    I do admit that B/R Live essentially satisfies that.

    While it is a less than ideal platform for me (and the mobile and desktop websites /apps that a bit of a disaster), I respect that B/R Live satisfies the minimal requirements that I have as a consumer of NLL content.

    (*) I will tolerate different broadcasters in different nations - one broadcaster per nation.
     
  18. swami24

    swami24 Well-Known Member

    Well at least the Wings are not up against the Eagles.
     
  19. Hollywood42

    Hollywood42 Well-Known Member

    Thank god

    A. I wouldn’t of gone lol
    B. Those who did go would battle serious xfinity live traffic and parking
     
  20. AFedyk

    AFedyk Guest

    San Diego and Philli looked like decent crowds. Vancouver looks like a ghost town.
     

Share This Page