Page 1 of 1

Forbes rates the Blues as the least-valuable NHL franchise

Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 4:24 pm
by sparty09
http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian ... 1-billion/

Which actually makes last season's run all the more impressive.

Re: Forbes rates the Blues as the least-valuable NHL franchi

Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 4:44 pm
by theohall
But teams like the Carolina Hurricanes, Phoenix Coyotes, Tampa Bay Lightning, Anaheim Ducks and Columbus Blue Jackets would still have trouble making money unless they went at least two rounds in the playoffs.
Interesting that the Blues are not included in the list of teams which would have trouble making money.

Re: Forbes rates the Blues as the least-valuable NHL franchi

Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 7:44 pm
by dmiles2186
Can't wait for the Blues to move and then St. Louis will get an NBA team!

---said nobody ever.

Re: Forbes rates the Blues as the least-valuable NHL franchi

Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 8:02 pm
by gaijin
dmiles2186 wrote:Can't wait for the Blues to move and then St. Louis will get an NBA team!

---said nobody ever.
Actually, there's probably quite a few people who say that in St. Louis... :(

Re: Forbes rates the Blues as the least-valuable NHL franchi

Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 8:31 pm
by glen a richter
Some jackass on a yahoo article comment section said he expects the Blues to relocate to Quebec City. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?

Re: Forbes rates the Blues as the least-valuable NHL franchi

Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2012 11:00 am
by WaukeeBlues
I doubt it. Teh Bettman and NHL have made it clear that if you're a 1967 team or earlier that you're too old to fail.

Re: Forbes rates the Blues as the least-valuable NHL franchi

Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2012 11:19 am
by kodos
I've read that Forbes basically pulls these numbers out of their butt.

I'm sure the Blues aren't worth much, and they may very well be worth the least, but this list is based on some made-up voodoo numbers.

Re: Forbes rates the Blues as the least-valuable NHL franchi

Posted: Sat Dec 01, 2012 3:14 pm
by cprice12
kodos wrote:I've read that Forbes basically pulls these numbers out of their butt.

I'm sure the Blues aren't worth much, and they may very well be worth the least, but this list is based on some made-up voodoo numbers.
You're never going to convince me that right now, the Columbus Blue Jackets are worth more money than the St. Louis Blues.

Re: Forbes rates the Blues as the least-valuable NHL franchi

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 1:00 pm
by SteveO
cprice12 wrote:
kodos wrote:I've read that Forbes basically pulls these numbers out of their butt.

I'm sure the Blues aren't worth much, and they may very well be worth the least, but this list is based on some made-up voodoo numbers.
You're never going to convince me that right now, the Columbus Blue Jackets are worth more money than the St. Louis Blues.
It's probably because they own their building and lot.

Re: Forbes rates the Blues as the least-valuable NHL franchi

Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2012 12:23 pm
by dmiles2186
Prngr44 wrote:
cprice12 wrote:
kodos wrote:I've read that Forbes basically pulls these numbers out of their butt.

I'm sure the Blues aren't worth much, and they may very well be worth the least, but this list is based on some made-up voodoo numbers.
You're never going to convince me that right now, the Columbus Blue Jackets are worth more money than the St. Louis Blues.
It's probably because they own their building and lot.
I was talking to my dad about this yesterday. I thought it was something like this with the Blues. Didn't Checketts make a deal to help in the short term but ultimately took away revenue down the road? Wasn't there something with the concession vendors like that too?