Didn't think it was worty of a sticky...but eh. Whatever.
Can we call this the "yawn" thread?
PelicansReport.com Sim League
New Orleans Hornets General Manager
Didn't think it was worty of a sticky...but eh. Whatever.
i am so glad they finally made a sticky of this. now we dont have to have 203543 threads about a rebrand.
My Anthony Davis website: http://thebrow.uphero.com/
How about just make it easy and rebrand them.....The New Orleans Rebrands
Even though I will probably never visit this thread agan, I love that it got a sticky so that it doesn't get a new topic every month. Thats nice.
Disagree with me all you want, but let's not pretend like a re-brand is some awful idea that can't possibly help the team in the long run in this city. Isn't the goal here, to make the team attractive to locals so they buy tickets and support the team through good times and bad?
I'm equating pro - rebranding folks and negativity. I'm saying it's been made part of a platform by some, and thay platform is not pro - New Orleans or pro -bowl team or pro - anything. Just anti-stuff from what I can tell.
For what it's worth, I think Chouest would rebrand within a year.
About the minority comment, that's my empirical observation.
I am glad this got stickied with all the threads that were made the same when there was another thread in the first page. Also makes it easier for people to post their ideas about the rebrand of the franchise.
I see it the exact opposite way ... from what I can tell the anti-rebrand sect appears to be die hard CLT and international fans or locals who believe all it will take is winning a title. I take exception with the winning thing because it's been proven this market will not support a winning NBA team. There, I said it. The hornets, for all the complaining, have been a winning/playoff level team in New Orleans more often than not ... in fact, we had a true NBA superstar on the team and that wasn't even enough to bring in fans. Apparently that is not good enough for our local fans who seem to only equate "winning" with actually winning titles, which is not exactly realistic.
Why hold onto the Hornets name? Is it steeped in tradition? Hardly, unless you are talking about CLT or international fans (which, from what I can tell don't buy season tickets and their tax dollars are not funneled directly to the franchise).
Maybe I'm bias but I don't see the pro-rebrand crowd as negative. However, how any fan can be positive right now is beyond me. I think from the empty seats it's clear this team has practically no following in the city, something needs to be done to change that ... unless it's more important to keep CLT and international fans happy than it is to take drastic measures to honestly try and attract local fans.
If this city will not support a winning NBA team, than why bother rebranding; let's start packing the trucks.
I don't see winning or a title as the answer. I just see it as people forming a habit. A rebrand may energize people enough to pay for itself . . . they cost millions.
I think the data you are citing about the people who do care and don't care is pretty filtered, and I think the tax arguments are very weak. 10,000 season tickets, which is a good bit above the median in the NBA, is worth about $20m. Fill the Arena up and you still don't cover the minimum salary once the cap drops. Local TV, $10m now, and maybe it'll go $20m or so. $30m is out of consideration this go-round (this is my own personal scribbling). Stern says we don't need revenue sharing, so no income there. Corporate interests don't care nearly as much how the team represents the area so much as getting their logo etc. in front of eyeballs, so how does a rebrand help them? Doesn't help the tax base, national TV, etc. Merchandise? You maybe get a bump from locals, but on a sustained basis, it's all about record and star power until you have a legacy.
If you look at the known NBA expenses relative to these dollar figures and the known losses, it's clear that the locals really don't count for much, and EVEN LESS in small market, and we are the smallest. Interests across the country and the world are MORE important to the bottom line.
As I said, I think Chouest, should he get the team, will rebrand within a year, if not upon completion of this season. The time to recoup the investment is when the brand is at an all-time low. The gate numbers reflect the record and star power, which are at a low, so the time to maximally capitalize, emphasis on captial, is now.
Frankly, I think any new owner is more likely to rebrand than not, but I think Chouest is the most likely. The way this is coming out in reports is causing him to take some licks, but I'm not so sure it's not bias and the fog of war more than a reflection of his commitment to the franchise + region.
Me seeing the benefits and cons and caring about them on some personal level are two different things. I just want all the debates about everything that we have to care about that other cities don't have to care about to stop.
I've written articles to this effect.
I'm not sure why you think the new owner is definitely going to move the team. Are you convinced that Benson and Chouest are out?
Can anyone PM me BigDub's email address? Been trying to get in touch with him for a week...
I was pretty disappointed to read that the strong lease we all hoped for would be no longer than a 10 year extension, which in the world of pro sports leases that is on the low end. Every lease can be bought out and even though we are hearing ours will have no outs, every lease has outs ... our current lease is the worst in the league for fans (to many benchmarks, it's even worse than the one in OKC which is also heavy in benchmarks for future performance). Memphis probably has the best lease in terms of outs, and even their very high buyout (which I believe is the highest of any buyout in any league) is not much of a deterrent for future buyers ... I suspect ours is not going to be on the Memphis level because already our lease (in terms of years) is less than half of the Memphis lease.
I might be in the minority on this one ... but after all this time I've grown to distrust the NBA. I don't want to see our fans held to benchmarks anymore, I don't want to see our fans held to impossibly high standards of performance for a franchise like this one.
I just see the outlook as rosier. Time will tell, and we both hope I'm right, we just look at this differently. Some people are in no way worried about relocation, and others see it as done. I'm worried about it until the ink is dry, and them I'm worried about the next deal, as I am with the Saints . . . will they need a $1B stadium? Will the owner then kick in? Where will it be? When does the fight start? How does what's going on in Minnesota now affect us later? Better to fight with Minnesota or Cali for the Saints? And on and on. Just as I worry about this team and what the next 9 figure allocation is, or 10 for the Saints.
We have no chance if this city doesn't grow in the corporate arena in the next decade. Thank goodness it shows some signs in that regard.
About the Hornets . . . I think we'll have them for a few years at least without issue and without benchmarks. Then the CBA, if we get the opt-out, will give pause to future relocations, and by that time other teams will be easier to dislodge than us. We definitely need more than 10(12)y to get to the point where it'll take refusal to build an Amway Center for them to leave, which is as secure as it gets . . . thanks Orlando . . .
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)