|
Post by Heanor Lair on Oct 7, 2004 16:16:56 GMT
For those postings that say the Steelers need the Panthers (gates) more than the other way around, rubbish, both clubs need each other equally. It also isnt just about the away support, as welcome as that is in both buildings. More Nottingham people go to a Steelers game than any other, even if there was no away support those gates are bigger. The clubs and the sport as a whole needs both the Steelers and the Panthers, and they, we, all need the rivalry to remain the same as the key fixtures in our sports callender. Dave I would agree to some extent with the last paragraph, but the question is do the Panthers need 3 home games against the Steelers to be financially viable, and do the Steelers need 3 home games against the Panthers to be financially viable. I would stick my neck out and say that if it went to 2 home games each against each other (if EIHL and BNL teams play each other twice home and twice away), the Panthers would still be viable, but if the Steelers lost another big pay day (forget rilvary this is about pounds and pence), what would that do to the Steelers,especially this season with their average attendance barely scraping 3000 (and thats with one derby game included). I dont think this Panthers - Steelers rilvary is a true symbiotitc relationship, I think financially Steelers are more dependant on Panthers fans cash, than Panthers are on Steelers fans cash. I am open to arguments to be persuaded otherwise. Regards HL
|
|
Shaggy
Forum Moderator
Am I a cynical idealist or an idealistic cynic?
Posts: 10,995
|
Post by Shaggy on Oct 7, 2004 22:08:31 GMT
The trouble IMHO with this whole "the Panthers and Steelers need their derby games to survive" thing is that it's a short-term distraction from the long-term problem. Sure - lots of fans, loads of ticket receipts, all very nice..... "hey, we're doing all right here!".
No we're not.
Firstly, we have to remember that this league - and the sport as a whole - is made up of much more than just our two clubs..... and we need the sport to prosper in order for us to survive more than the sport as a whole needs both the Panthers and the Steelers. Surely any solution or regime should be calculated to provide the maximum benefit to the sport as a whole rather than just our two clubs? (Remembering that it the whole sport benefits, so will we).
And should we really be relying upon these occasional 'big' games to make up for any lack in attendances over the season as a whole? Would it not make much more sense for each club to concentrate upon building up its own fanbase to ever greater heights? (and to encourage away travel, too).
Sure.... that's the tougher option. It would take more time, more effort - more initial outlay. But if we went down that road, would we all not come out of it much stronger? Wouldn't it be great to see the NIC packed out for a Panthers game against anyone but Sheffield? Wouldn't it be better to see that mass of empty seats in the Hallam FM Arena filled week in, week out?
The sport is bigger than just Nottingham vs Sheffield..... and so are the potential attendance receipts.
|
|
MP
Paul Adey
Hail hurts and rain is cold. Summer in the mountains
Posts: 6,811
|
Post by MP on Oct 7, 2004 23:43:51 GMT
Everything you say is true Dave and it would be wonderful if it can be made to happen.
However history suggests that crowds of that size are most unlikely to become the rule for British ice hockey no matter how well the sport is marketed.
Which leaves the likes of us and Sheffield with a problem in financing the bigger overheads we incurr through playing in the big multi-purpose arenas. That is why the big pay days are so important.
We are particulary vulnerable here in Nottingham as we don't have an alternative venue to fall back on if arena hockey becomes uneconomic.
|
|
|
Post by girdeaux on Oct 7, 2004 23:49:10 GMT
How long till Shaggy bites?? Mmm, provocative & inflammatory remark makes you sir, a troll
|
|
|
Post by girdeaux on Oct 7, 2004 23:53:43 GMT
There's more to British hockey than Nottingham Panthers versus Sheffield Steelers.
|
|
Ian
Matt Myers
Posts: 1,702
|
Post by Ian on Oct 8, 2004 7:38:19 GMT
There's more to British hockey than Nottingham Panthers versus Sheffield Steelers. Yes there is and we all need to consider the bigger picture. But I am firmly of the opinion that the Panthers-Steelers rivalry is good for the British game. Firstly in terms of the clubs themselves, the gate receipts and interest generated by these games is a vital part of their income. Look at it this way - they are businesses, and these derby games are the biggest "product" they have to sell, and the most lucrative. No surprise that they want to protect them, any company would react the same way to someone threatening to limit the number of their best-selling products they could sell (and that is essentially what reducing the number of games between teams would do). At the end of the day, bigger income equals a more stable and viable club over the long term and stable clubs are a pre-requisite for a stable league structure. I have no problem with my club or Sheffield wanting to keep this income stream coming in for that very reason. Second, the fans. These are the games people anticipate the most - just look at the additional HOME support they attract. Unlike Shaggy, I don't want Steelers to be "just another opposition team" - I love the rivalry, it is what sport is all about. The demise of the Steelers would detract from the experience of being a Panthers fan as far as I am concerned. Thirdly, the bigger picture. Yes, we need to build a stable and sustainable league structure in this country. No argument there, it is the only way forward and no-one is questioning that. But surely what we need to do is build on the good elements of what we have now and eliminate the bad. The Panthers-Steelers rivalry is one of the good points - when it comes to an advert for our sport, attracting sponsors and, most important of all, the media interest we need, what could be better than 7 or 8,000 people packed into an arena to watch top level British hockey in an electric atmosphere, with the edge that comes from a local derby and maybe the odd touch of controversy thrown in. That should not be sacrified on the altar of league unification. The Panthers and the Steelers are certainly not the be all and end all of British hockey, but they are two of the biggest supported clubs and their thriving rivalry is one of the game's assets. To eliminate or diminish it (to whatever extent) would not help to make a more stable league or a better future for British hockey.
|
|
|
Post by grayhead on Oct 8, 2004 8:48:04 GMT
I may be stating the obvious, but the whole issue here is getting bums on seats. The future of hockey in this country is having enough revenue for each team in the league to be viable. As stated earlier, some teams are arena teams therefore have increased costs, others do not have the luxury of large arenas and have to make do with what they have got. It interests me how clubs market their product, being from a sales and marketing background. In an ideal world, every club wants to fill their stadium/arena week in week out. In practice, several factors dictate what the numbers are a) Opposition, b) when the last home game was, c) day of the week. All clubs have season ticket supporters, therefore have a known budget as a minimum. What they don't know is how many people will turn up on the night. I know in the past, Panthers have given away to schools and sponsor companies a number of free tickets to games. I believe that this should be encouraged more and more. I know many season ticket holders and full paying supporters would object, but have to appreciate that it is in the interest of the club and league to increase the crowd. Not only does this create a better atmosphere, it generates increased revenue for the stadium, and more importantly will 'convert' more people to come to watch the game (as a paying fan). I don't know what the uptake would be for every 1000 free tickets given out, as to repeat supporters, but it must be a fairly good return. I remember when I first came to watch Panthers in the early 1980's. I was told that I would either love it or hate the sport after seeing just one game. I believe this to be true, as I have taken numerous work colleagues to games who have either fallen for the sport or hated it. More have fallen for it. To sum up this post, I would like to see a full NIC and Hallam Arena (and all other stadiums) week in week out. When we have a midweek game with Belfast on 26th October, I would guess we may get 4000. As the kids are on half-term, wouldn't it be better to give out free tickets to 1000 kids that bring along their parents, making an extra 3000 (7000) in total. If only 500 are hooked, then at least this will help our attempt to increase the popularity of our passion. Don't forget, the other Nottingham sports teams are not having a very good time at the moment. This is the time when Panthers should be looking to convert some of these.
|
|
|
Post by girdeaux on Oct 8, 2004 9:50:22 GMT
Firstly in terms of the clubs themselves, the gate receipts and interest generated by these games is a vital part of their income. Look at it this way - they are businesses, and these derby games are the biggest "product" they have to sell, and the most lucrative. No surprise that they want to protect them, any company would react the same way to someone threatening to limit the number of their best-selling products they could sell (and that is essentially what reducing the number of games between teams would do). At the end of the day, bigger income equals a more stable and viable club over the long term and stable clubs are a pre-requisite for a stable league structure. I have no problem with my club or Sheffield wanting to keep this income stream coming in for that very reason. No I agree Ian. Both clubs want the money that'll keep them stable, so I don't see any problems with their desire to keep this fixture high profile for that reason Second, the fans. These are the games people anticipate the most - just look at the additional HOME support they attract. Unlike Shaggy, I don't want Steelers to be "just another opposition team" - I love the rivalry, it is what sport is all about. The demise of the Steelers would detract from the experience of being a Panthers fan as far as I am concerned. I don't agree with Ian from my own point of view. Sure it's nice to beat Sheffield, but I can honestly say, that for me, games between the two aren't generally viewed with any form of heightened anticipation anymore. I think our rivalry has been hyped up too much & has fueled too many flash points between the two sets of fans. From a Panthers' fan point of view, I'd like our club to seek other rivalries, rather than Panthers-Steelers, Panthers-Steelers all the time. There's a massive potential with Blaze & the rivalry with Devils has always been there anyway... I'd prefer to look forward to multiple derbies than just the one Thirdly, the bigger picture. Yes, we need to build a stable and sustainable league structure in this country. No argument there, it is the only way forward and no-one is questioning that. But surely what we need to do is build on the good elements of what we have now and eliminate the bad. The Panthers-Steelers rivalry is one of the good points - when it comes to an advert for our sport, attracting sponsors and, most important of all, the media interest we need, what could be better than 7 or 8,000 people packed into an arena to watch top level British hockey in an electric atmosphere, with the edge that comes from a local derby and maybe the odd touch of controversy thrown in. That should not be sacrified on the altar of league unification. The Panthers and the Steelers are certainly not the be all and end all of British hockey, but they are two of the biggest supported clubs and their thriving rivalry is one of the game's assets. To eliminate or diminish it (to whatever extent) would not help to make a more stable league or a better future for British hockey. I'd agree that the rivalry between the two can be marketed as a positive for the sport, but if handled wrongly, may alienate other clubs. " You're supposed to be Elite" is what BNL fans have been signing when their clubs have beaten Elite League clubs... Why are they signing that? Okay it's a tad childish, but it shows there still a feeling of " Them & us" within this sport. Panthers & Steelers blah blah blah isn't going to make any barriers easier to climb
|
|
Ian
Matt Myers
Posts: 1,702
|
Post by Ian on Oct 8, 2004 10:04:09 GMT
I'd agree that the rivalry between the two can be marketed as a positive for the sport, but if handled wrongly, may alienate other clubs. Panthers & Steelers blah blah blah isn't going to make any barriers easier to climb Agree with you to some extent in that it needs to be handled correctly. I'm not in favour of excessive hyping (as has admittedly been done in the past, and quite shamelessly too) but I do feel that by trying to water down the Panthers - Steelers rivalry (and the other rivalries that exist within the sport, which would also suffer) other clubs could be cutting off their noses to spite their face. I just think that one of the best adverts for our sport, and for any new league, to potential sponsors and the media would be a full arena of passionate fans watching hotly contested hockey action between two financially stable clubs. I don't want to play them every other week, but expanding to too big a league in one fell swoop could cause as many problems as it solves.
|
|
|
Post by gazzathedevil on Oct 8, 2004 10:30:34 GMT
This is probably the best Hockey conversation i have seen on a Forum for quite some time!!!!
There is no doubt that in whatever system british ice hockey is in that the Panthers and Steelers rivalry should be marketed as a highlight, Much like Coventry and Cardiff, fife and dundee etc
But how much more special would those nottingham-sheffield games be if you only played 4 regular season games? Bragging rights would last longer anticipation would be off the charts, and the atmosphere ten fold better IMHO
Couple that with the fact that you have more variety and thus more rivalries born, i mean come on who isnt intrigued about your next visit to Guilford after the JC incident?
|
|
MP
Paul Adey
Hail hurts and rain is cold. Summer in the mountains
Posts: 6,811
|
Post by MP on Oct 8, 2004 11:41:49 GMT
But how much more special would those nottingham-sheffield games be if you only played 4 regular season games? Bragging rights would last longer anticipation would be off the charts, and the atmosphere ten fold better IMHO From a fans viewpoint you're right Gazza - fewer meetings between the teams adds to the intensity of the games. Look at it from the clubs perspective and it won't seem so attractive. If we had 2 home games against the Steelers and got a 6500 sell out crowd for each, then we would gross 13000 seats sold for the 2 games If we played them 4 times at home, even with reduced interest and a crowd of say 4500 per game, that would still gross 18000 tickets sold. The difference of 5000 seats is the equivalent of an above average crowd for an extra home game on the season. No prizes for guessing which option the clubs would prefer. It's difficult enough to cover your costs when running a hockey club let alone make much of a profit.
|
|