For a team like the Panthers who are supposedly struggling to even get noticed in South Florida, is this not completely counterproductive?  I was planning a week in Florida over New Year’s and catching the Canadiens game, am rethinking now.

Posted by Randy from Fredericton on 07/17/08 at 06:01 PM ET

haha, in Florida you don’t pay to see the Panthers play, you pay to see the team they’re up against.

Posted by John on 07/17/08 at 06:10 PM ET

This totally runs counter to Lil’ Gary’s concept of league eqality. In Lil’ Gary’s world, all cities and all teams are created equal. They have the same payroll. The owners’ percentage of revenues devoted to profit is equal. Hey, it’s all one big homogenous world.

The reality is that the only way “loser” franchises (like the Panthers) can stay in business is to sponge off the winners of the league (like the Wings). They charge more when the winners come to town. And, at the end of the season, they get a healthy dose of the winners money to keep them afloat.

Lil’ Gary’s Utopia is a sham. And, as we all know, Lil’ Gary is an ass!

Posted by OlderThanChelios from Grand Rapids on 07/17/08 at 06:16 PM ET

Didn’t Phoenix try the same thing last year?

(And also with games against Detroit, I believe?  They were annoyed that there were so many fans wearing the “wrong” red to teh games.)

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 07/17/08 at 06:19 PM ET

Your right Baroque. Phoenix has been charging extra for Wings tickets for a few years now. According to Wayne he intended to make Wings fans pay dearly to see their team. It made no sense.
Do you sell out your arena at regular price, or have it half empty? A no brainer there.  I lived in Phoenix for 13 years and had the pleasure of being among the many that helped rename it Hockeytown West. Oh what a joy it was to sit at AWA and listen to the Red Wings suck chant, with about 10,000 other Wings fans.

Posted by Kate from Pa. on 07/17/08 at 06:40 PM ET

“Premium” games are very common, take a look at various teams’ ticket sections on the web and you will see this. However, the flat, $25-per-seat surcharge is a bit steep. For the Sens, it’s a 40% premium for Toronto games, and 10% for Detroit, Montreal, and Pittsburg.

The reality is that you need to keep pace with league growth to get those special fund millions from the rich teams. Every time a rich team increases ticket prices, to get a little richer (see Leafs, Ontario Teachers Pension Fund, and many other teams with equally dollar-minded owners), the poorer market teams have to try to get more fans to the arena AND make more money off of them as well. It’s time for a more well thought out cap scheme.

Posted by SENShobo from Waterloo, ON on 07/17/08 at 07:59 PM ET

Interesting.  I’m going to be moving to Ohio in a couple weeks and just today was checking out Blue Jackets’ ticket prices and noticed they had some “premium” games last season.  Looked mostly like Saturday night games which is a real pisser because I’ll probably be living more than an hour from Columbus.  When would I be able to come down for a game?  Oh, I don’t know - how about Saturdays!

Might as well just drive to Pittsburgh or Detroit at that rate.

Posted by Winter Wheat from KS on 07/17/08 at 08:02 PM ET

I would say this isn’t a wise move. I can see how teams in traditional markets could afford to do something like this, but not teams in new, fledgling markets like Florida or Phoenix.

I am not aware if Atlanta is doing anything like this, though I expect I would have heard about it if they were. Randy, maybe you would consider visiting Atlanta instead. Or if you really want to, you could visit Tampa Bay instead. It’s still Florida, only more mullet and less surcharges.

Posted by Alan from Atlanta on 07/17/08 at 09:53 PM ET

Two types of teams do this. Teams that are totally greedy like Ottawa...and teams that don’t belong in the league like Florida. Florida knows they don’t have any fans so they are milking the Wings, Rangers, Flyers or whoevers fans that actually would buy a ticket to a Florida game...I’m kinda shocked the Bruins have never tried this but they know that the average Boston hockey fan hates the B’s ownership so they would be playing with fire if they did this....Alot of teams have different prices for weekend vs weekday games but that is understandable. There is greater demand for one day over the other.....

Posted by kevin from boston on 07/17/08 at 10:12 PM ET

This is the segment of the article that I found even more interesting ...

As has been the case in the past, the schedule is light on home games in November and December but heavy after the New Year. Florida plays 25 of its 41 games in the second half of the season at home.

“That’s because our attendance typically picks up after Thanksgiving, when we have more fans down from the Northeast and Canada,” General Manager Jacques Martin said. “The drawback to that is not having as many home games early.”

Florida is on the road for nine of 14 games in November, a month in which the Panthers have struggled in recent years.

So the team winds up getting disadvantaged by playing so many away games early in the season so that the money will actually come in from the home games later in the season when fans arrive from the North - and by that point they will likely wind up paying to see a team that is already in a deep hole because they got off to a bad start since they were never at home.  Nice.

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 07/17/08 at 10:41 PM ET

Baroque, what I see is that the league is actually giving Florida an unfair competitive advantage in two ways. One, the league is allowing the team to purposely time home games to coincide with the population flux that occurs in south Florida, thus enabling the team the opportunity to maximize ticket exposure. Now I’m sure that the Canadian teams would like to have most of their home games played in the second half of the year when its cold and the outdoor entertainment options are limited, but I doubt that they get that advantage.

Two, you are right that the team might get off to a bad start because of too many road games. But what if they get off to a good start or just even a .500 start. Because of the scheduling advantage, they don’t have to travel as much during the end of the year, saving wear and tear on their team that other teams have to go through just before the playoffs. To me, scheduling should be unbiased. It just doesn’t seem right for the league to do this.

Posted by UMFan from Colorado on 07/18/08 at 12:12 AM ET

Instead of “Best” I would say “Pay More to See the Most POPULAR” - there will no doubt be a surcharge for Leafs games, too!

Posted by Sunny from Raleigh, NC on 07/18/08 at 09:27 AM ET

I think the Panthers are really hurting themselves by doing this.  I have seen a couple of games there and would guess that at least 40-50% of fans in attendance are voting for the other team (depending on the team of course).  It really annoys me since I was planning on catching a couple of games during Thanksgiving week but refuse to be blackmailed like this.  Maybe I can get them to sell me a 2 game plan…

Posted by Mike from Idaho on 07/18/08 at 11:15 AM ET

Now I’m sure that the Canadian teams would like to have most of their home games played in the second half of the year when its cold and the outdoor entertainment options are limited, but I doubt that they get that advantage.

I know even in markets where hockey is popular, the attendance picks up after other sports in the area finish their seasons - the same way baseball attendance picks up after the kids are out of school.

But what if they get off to a good start or just even a .500 start.

True - but the Panthers have had troubles with slow starts no matter where they played for years.  That’s why I was speculating that the road games at the beginning of the season were hurting them - or maybe they are just a bad team at the start of the season, and nothing is going to change that.

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 07/18/08 at 11:41 AM ET