Sabres season ticket prices going up again

[matter2003]

I was reading the BN article about it and got to this part:

 

"The Sabres, who will miss the playoffs for the fifth straight season, have used a clause in the collective bargaining agreement to justify their repeated increases. The CBA dictates that clubs that receive revenue sharing must keep pace with the league’s average ticket price. If the teams fall below 75 percent of the average they “shall be required to submit to the league and Revenue Sharing Oversight Committee a forward-looking three-year business plan to establish a framework for improving its financial performance.”

 

However, NHL teams that have missed the playoffs in recent years have declined to raise their prices. The Toronto Maple Leafs stayed flat this year, and the Calgary Flames announced earlier this month they will not raise next year’s prices."

 

Well no kidding...Toronto, one of the priciest tickets in the NHL doesn't have to raise its prices to keep up with the league average?? Wow, that's not common sense or anything. Its the height of ridiculous that he tries to pair these two things together.

[That Aud Smell]

I read that it was a 4% increase?

 

Meh. I deal with vendors all the time at work. Increasing prices annually by ~4% is pretty standard stuff.

 

I get the P.R. aspect of it - maybe not the best of looks.

[darksabre]

Things that cost money continue to cost money. 

[Stoner]

I was reading the BN article about it and got to this part:

 

"The Sabres, who will miss the playoffs for the fifth straight season, have used a clause in the collective bargaining agreement to justify their repeated increases. The CBA dictates that clubs that receive revenue sharing must keep pace with the league’s average ticket price. If the teams fall below 75 percent of the average they “shall be required to submit to the league and Revenue Sharing Oversight Committee a forward-looking three-year business plan to establish a framework for improving its financial performance.”

 

However, NHL teams that have missed the playoffs in recent years have declined to raise their prices. The Toronto Maple Leafs stayed flat this year, and the Calgary Flames announced earlier this month they will not raise next year’s prices."

 

Well no kidding...Toronto, one of the priciest tickets in the NHL doesn't have to raise its prices to keep up with the league average?? Wow, that's not common sense or anything. Its the height of ridiculous that he tries to pair these two things together.

What about Calgary?

 

I'd like to see the Sabres show their math. Would not raising ticket prices for one season put them below the 75% threshold? How do they cut it so close? Would 2% do the trick? Why isn't 6% needed? I've always thought the idea to "blame the CBA" was cover so the bean counters could, as Smell suggests, get "what the market will bear." Against, I might add in a nod to the owner, the spirit of what Terry said on Day One.

 

I can't complain about Vogl's reporting here, because he's getting closer to explaining it right. But the CBA does not dictate that teams getting revenue sharing meet this threshold. That is, they don't lose their revenue-sharing as a result. They can lose it down the road, but other things can happen first, and whether those things are good or bad is certainly in the eye of the beholder. (Underperforming teams can get a grant from the Industry Growth Fund, for example.)

Edited March 25, 2016 by PASabreFan

[That Aud Smell]

How does the value of the Loonie factor into all of this?

[Thwomp!]

Well to be clear, Terry never said where he would drill new wells. We assumed he'd frack land not ticket buyers' wallets. :D

 

But overall yes, I believe that they are testing what the market will bear, and with the promise of future success that market will likely continue to bear more and more for awhile yet.

[tom webster]

How does the value of the Loonie factor into all of this?

 

 

I'm sure its killing Canadian teams not named Toronto and Montreal and a significant portion of the Sabres' market.

Well to be clear, Terry never said where he would drill new wells. We assumed he'd frack land not ticket buyers' wallets. :D

 

But overall yes, I believe that they are testing what the market will bear, and with the promise of future success that market will likely continue to bear more and more for awhile yet.

 Its entirely about what the market will bear. I understand PA's disdain for the pr stuff but he knows better. He just wants the team to be honest. What they sell tickets for has nothing to do with their bottom line or their obligations to the CBA. Its all about maximizing revenue and when the tickets start to go unsold, the price will stabilize.

[spndnchz]

My tickets didn't go up.

[beerme1]

My tickets didn't go up.

 

Mine did $4 each. Again.

 

 

Matter2003, I expected to see a thread based on this but I was expecting a certain someone else to have started it lol. 

[PromoTheRobot]

Is there a graphic showing new prices anywhere? I think mine went up a dollar, up in the nosebleeds.

[Stoner]

Its entirely about what the market will bear. I understand PA's disdain for the pr stuff but he knows better. He just wants the team to be honest. What they sell tickets for has nothing to do with their bottom line or their obligations to the CBA. Its all about maximizing revenue and when the tickets start to go unsold, the price will stabilize.

It'll be interesting to see the renewal rate. The secondary market is way down, no?

[Stoner]

Fun with numbers. It's probably not this simple, but would the average ticket gate be the average league attendance x average ticket price? If so, the average gate this year would be about 17,500 x $65, or $1,137,500. 75% of that is $853,125. The Sabres' average gate would be about 18,500 x $50, or $925,000.

 

It's important to note in this discussion that Russ Brandon, as far as I know, hasn't made any comments along the lines of those Ted Black used to make, which were always cleverly crafted ("we can't jeopardize revenue sharing," for example). I think the Sabres were smart to release this in late March and not late April like last year, or on fan appreciation night the one year.

Edited March 25, 2016 by PASabreFan

[tom webster]

It'll be interesting to see the renewal rate. The secondary market is way down, no?

It will be. Like you point out in the next post, I'm sure they know at what point its better to sell 17K at x amount versus 19070 at y amount. Is it better to eat some games in return for a windfall at 10 games? I'm sure its all calculated down to the penny.

[SDS]

1. Conceptually, raising prices this year is a bad idea.

 

2. At what point can we just get past what Terry Pegula did in his 1st week of ownership? It is 5 years later.

 

3. I have no idea if this is accurate, but Michael Gilbert did say the Sabres lose money. When he said it, it was in the tone of - "the idea of a profit is laughable..."

[tom webster]

1. Conceptually, raising prices this year is a bad idea.

 

2. At what point can we just get past what Terry Pegula did in his 1st week of ownership? It is 5 years later.

 

3. I have no idea if this is accurate, but Michael Gilbert did say the Sabres lose money. When he said it, it was in the tone of - "the idea of a profit is laughable..."

I agree we need to get well past #2 but we also really need to get past #3. Until any pro sports want to open their books, they should not be allowed to utter those words. As the great Dr. Johnny Fever once said, or, since I am old, to paraphrase him, profit and loss is but a mere theory in the landscape of big business.

[woods-racer]

It's hard for me to believe that a profit can NOT be made when the number one expenditure is on a cap control, to ensure all teams are profitable. Let a lone teams that sell to their season ticket max, and still seem to put butts from the secondary market in seats to spend money during the great tank-etion.

[SDS]

It's hard for me to believe that a profit can NOT be made when the number one expenditure is on a cap control, to ensure all teams are profitable. Let a lone teams that sell to their season ticket max, and still seem to put butts from the secondary market in seats to spend money during the great tank-etion.

 

Analysis of season ticket sales without the associated comparative price is meaningless. Everyone has the same cap. Not everyone has the same revenues.

 

http://www.hookedonhockeymagazine.com/average-nhl-ticket-prices-2014-2015-season/

[DirtDart]

I'm hoping that 1,500 of the current season ticket holders drop due to the price hike. Then selfishly I will make the cut next year :)

[tom webster]

They are about to get $500 million for an expansion franchise. Do you really want to believe that two thirds of the existing franchises are losing money? They might show tens of million dollars in losses but it's all creative accounting.

[woods-racer]

Analysis of season ticket sales without the associated comparative price is meaningless. Everyone has the same cap. Not everyone has the same revenues.

 

http://www.hookedonhockeymagazine.com/average-nhl-ticket-prices-2014-2015-season/

 

My comparative with out books is by gut only.

 

Getting players just to get to league salary minimum, yet selling season tickets to their max (seats sold, which I wasn't clear on before) at prices just under half the league average sounds like a profitable team.

 

If that model is not profitable, then there are a lot of teams much worse off and the league has more to worry about than the lack of scoring.

[beerme1]

I'm hoping that 1,500 of the current season ticket holders drop due to the price hike. Then selfishly I will make the cut next year :)

 

 

You're not gonna see that. I'll say 500 at the very most and probably less than that. The reward is coming.

[Stoner]

The secondary market looks quite robust for tomorrow's game. Someone is selling 300-level tix for $250.

[darksabre]

The secondary market looks quite robust for tomorrow's game. Someone is selling 300-level tix for $250.

I honestly can't seem to figure out who exactly has money in this region. Season tickets sell out no problem, the rising prices don't stop people from buying, developers can't built "luxury apartments" downtown fast enough. Who are these people? 

[beerme1]

I honestly can't seem to figure out who exactly has money in this region. Season tickets sell out no problem, the rising prices don't stop people from buying, developers can't built "luxury apartments" downtown fast enough. Who are these people? 

 

 

The Government.

 

And they pretend to live modestly.

Edited March 26, 2016 by beerme1

[sodbuster]

The Government.

 

And they pretend to live modestly.

Yeah, that's certainly the case for the development around town. So much of it is subsidised in various ways. Another, smaller part is that when your town reaches a certain level of economic depression, hipsters start to recognize it as "quaint," and start to move in to colonize it. It won't be long before Tim Horton's is pushed out by freakin' Crepes-a-Go-Go.

 

As for who can afford the tickets, look around the lower bowl of the arena when Montreal and Toronto are in town and you'll get your answer. STHs can flip those games and recoup enough of their cash to make the season worth it, and it's still relatively cheap for fans of the Leafs and Habs to come here. Win win.