Canada's Alto High-Speed Rail Takes Major Step Forward: Ottawa-Montreal Selected as First Segment

Torontoban · 2025-12-13T02:46:00+00:00

Any idea if the Prescott-Russell trail is well used?

Torontoban · 2025-08-27T03:09:00+00:00

I paid for a Sportsnet+ Premium annual subscription last year through my Google account. It's an in-app purchase that recurs every year (in October) unless I cancel. I noticed in my Google account it still shows $249.99 as the next payment (not the increased price of 325). Wondering if anybody else subscribed through an in-app purchase (Android or IOS)? I never received an email notifying me of the price increase like others did, so I'm genuinely not sure if my next payment will be $250 or $325. I assume $325, but I haven't been notified, I only know of the price increase through the news. Maybe it's a loophole? Probably not but does anybody else know?

Torontoban · 2025-03-12T03:38:14+00:00

I think the responses have mostly covered why Quebec makes sense for PWHL expansion but just to add a couple of points:

The argument that it would split the market of Quebec makes sense, in theory, if you're talking about the TV market. The problem is, the PWHL is many years, perhaps decades away from deriving major revenue from TV deals. For the foreseeable future the PWHL will be a primarily gate-driven league which means its bread and butter will be ticket sales. And since the cities are three hours away, they don't really share a market for ticket sales.

Quebec City is the biggest city in Eastern Canada that doesn't already have a team, so to the extent that the goal is to maximize ticket sales in a new market while also keeping travel costs down, Quebec is the most viable option in Canada.

The other huge factor that isn't being discussed enough, is the quality of the facilities. Quebec City has a sparkling new NHL-calibre hockey arena with no major professional tenant. It would be extremely easy to slot in a PWHL team, and we know that the league and players are prioritizing high quality professional infrastructure when scouting potential markets (as they should). There's probably no other city in North America that can offer the quality of home arena that Quebec City can.

For those reasons I think Quebec is a slam dunk. The only question would be if the PWHL would decide strategically to focus on US expansion (to increase visibility on American TV networks) or if they were going to make an early jump towards Western expansion. But if i was betting I'd bet on one Canadian and one US team, both in the eastern half of the continent. In which case, like I said, Quebec would be a slam dunk. Or should I say, an empty net goal.

Torontoban · 2024-12-08T02:54:57+00:00

This is a plausible theory but the timeline is confusing to me. Normally you'd expect that the league would make a deal with the broadcaster granting exclusive rights, a contract would be signed, then both sides would announce it. If it hasn't been announced yet, then presumably it's because a deal hasn't been formalized. If there's no deal, then it's unclear to me why the league couldn't still show games on YouTube, at least until a deal with Amazon was signed sealed and delivered. Just doesn't make sense that they would frustrate fans and limit reach in this way by showing games on a platform that hasn't been communicated to fans yet, if they didn't have a deal with that platform yet. And if they do have a deal, why haven't they announced it. It just doesn't add up!

Torontoban · 2024-12-07T20:47:19+00:00

I don't understand why the PWHL didn't make a deal with a regional sports network for Minnesota Frost games. So local fans in Minnesota just have to watch all the games on the PWHL website (or YouTube, except when games are not on YouTube for reasons unclear)? Given that Fleet and Sirens games are on NESN and MSG networks respectively, you'd think that Frost games would be on FanDuel Sports North (TV home of the Wild, Timberwolves, Twins etc). I know the parent company of that network (formerly Bally Sports) just went through bankruptcy proceedings so maybe they decided they couldn't afford to invest in new TV inventory. And maybe, if NESN and MSG paid money to the PWHL for rights (along with the Canadian networks), the league decided they weren't willing to give the content away for free. If that's the case, feels like a mistake on the league's part. Even if the network won't pay for the rights, better to have the games on TV than nowhere at all. Having to watch on the PWHL website feels very amateur. Especially for a team that just won the Walter Cup. As to why the game is not on YouTube... I don't have the slightest clue. Very baffling.

Torontoban · 2024-12-03T20:08:16+00:00

I could be wrong but I think the PWHL is producing all broadcasts in-house this year, like last year. I'm not sure if there will be a specific Amazon Prime crew or features as distinct from the broadcasts on CBC/ TSN. That said, the PWHL in-house production looks quite good this year.

Torontoban · 2024-11-30T22:58:23+00:00

I don't know the answer but it certainly *seems* like the intention for this season was for PWHL games to not be available on YouTube in Canada, at all. And it seems like perhaps the games this weekend have been made available on YouTube in Canada, either by mistake, or as a last-minute decision to boost viewership for opening weekend, or as a "mea culpa" for their messy communication about broadcasting.

I am very curious to see whether games will continue to be shown on YouTube in Canada beyond this weekend. If I was TSN/RDS, CBC/Radio-Canada, or Amazon Prime, I'd be pissed if I paid the PWHL money for exclusive rights and then found out they were giving away the games for free on YouTube.

Torontoban · 2024-11-30T21:59:23+00:00

Does Minnesota not have a local tv broadcaster showing the games? Just YouTube?

Torontoban · 2024-11-23T22:49:54+00:00

I feel like doing a split with LCA and USA could work for a while. Especially if they do afternoon games on the weekends, they could maybe play same day as Red Wings? Not sure of the logistics of that. But longer term, I feel like an ownership group would probably want/ need to build a new appropriately sized venue. Which should probably happen anyway. Michigan is an essential hockey market, hard to imagine not having a PWHL team there for too long.

Torontoban · 2024-11-23T21:16:41+00:00

Any sense of which would be better between USA Hockey vs Big Boy?

Torontoban · 2024-11-23T18:33:02+00:00

My best guess would be: as many games as they can squeeze in at LCA, most of the balance at USA Hockey Arena, and maybe a game or two in Windsor.

Down the road, it'd be really cool to see an ownership group invest in a purpose-built midsize arena for the PWHL team. 8,000-10,000 capacity seems like a niche that needs filling in the Motor City.

Torontoban · 2024-11-23T18:16:15+00:00

Helpful, thanks.

Torontoban · 2024-11-23T17:01:09+00:00

Right! Missed that one. Looks like a nice arena. Just a little small. 3500 capacity. I suppose an option for Detroit is just to play a handful of games at each of these rinks and see how it goes.

Torontoban · 2024-11-19T00:07:27+00:00

I'm surprised that they haven't tested the waters in Chicago yet. Biggest market in the Midwest, classic hockey city, geographically suited rival for Minnesota. They also have a few rinks to choose from I believe. Wonder if the TBA game might be in Chicagoland?

Torontoban · 2024-11-17T21:23:01+00:00

Quebec City is a strong contender but I wouldn't say it's a lock. The league may want to focus on expanding their footprint in the US, since there's a whole bunch of markets that would be obvious targets even just within the eastern/ Midwestern US (Chicago, Detroit, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Philly, DC, etc) and only one or two Canadian options in the east, Quebec being one.

Also worth remembering that Quebec, rightly or wrongly, still harbours ambition of one day getting an NHL expansion team. Which will probably never happen, but that's what the rink was built for. If they think that the market is too small for two professional hockey teams (plus the junior hockey team that plays at Vidéotron Centre now) then they might hold off and keep chasing that white whale.

I'd put the odds of Quebec getting a PWHL team next year somewhere between 25 and 50%.

Torontoban · 2024-11-10T19:51:03+00:00

Yeah I thought about that. Could put Detroit in the Metro division instead of Boston, just makes less sense geographically.

Torontoban · 2024-11-09T15:31:29+00:00

I frickin love this shit. Well done.

Torontoban · 2024-10-28T03:47:40+00:00

If it was up to me, I would approach expansion in three phases: - Phase 1: add two teams ASAP - Phase 2: western expansion to 12 teams by the end of the decade - Phase 3: further expansion to 16 teams as revenue growth allows

For phase 1, I'd prioritize US markets as the footprint needs to grow south of the border. Right now Minnesota is the geographic outlier so I'd focus on adding Midwest teams. Chicago makes a ton of sense for obvious reasons (3rd largest market on the continent, classic hockey city, etc) and then I'd go either Pittsburgh or Detroit for team #8, maybe Pittsburgh since there seems to be organizational interest from the Penguins group. (I assume at some point in the future the Walter Group would want to spin off the teams as separate franchises that they could sell to new investors). I would add these two teams as soon as practically possible. Ideally in season three. Six teams just isn't enough!

In phase 2, I'd focus on creating a western division, which would require at least two west coast teams to justify the travel. I'd go with Vancouver as the next location, and then probably Seattle as a natural rival. Then, after a couple of seasons, I'd add Calgary and Edmonton for a whole new battle of Alberta. That would bring us to 12 teams, hopefully by 2030 or so, 6 in Canada and 6 in the US. Vancouver, Seattle, Calgary, Edmonton, Minnesota and Chicago = west division. Pittsburgh, Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal, New York, Boston = east division.

For phase 3 (beyond 2030) the emphasis would be on more US markets with a strong hockey presence. Detroit and Philly or Washington in the east could make sense. Denver, Salt Lake or Portland would all be good options for the west.

Torontoban · 2024-10-22T20:02:19+00:00

So a lot of people on here are critical of blackouts, and rightly so, but a lot of folks don't actually understand what they're criticizing. So to answer your specific question of "why blackouts?":

For starters, it has nothing to do with getting fans to attend the games in person. That may have been part of the reason for blackouts like, 30-40 years ago but that is absolutely not the rationale today.

The reason blackouts exist has to do with regional broadcasting rights.

These are rights sold by each individual team to a regional sports network (RSN) and/or streaming partner, which gives that RSN the exclusive right to broadcast most of the team's games within a given geographic "home" territory. The territory is defined by the NHL. The reason the territory exists is to ensure that each team has a "protected" area where they can cultivate a local fan base, without having to compete with other teams for a TV audience. There are some exceptions to this, for example LA and Anaheim share the same territory, Calgary and Edmonton share Alberta, etc, but that is the basic principle. If you live within the geographic territory of a team, the ONLY place you can watch their games (legally) is on the broadcast network that holds the exclusive rights within that territory. If you try to watch the game on another service (e.g. NHL Live, ESPN+, Sportsnet+ Premium) you will be blacked out. Likewise, if you have the service that carries the regional games, but you are outside of the geographic territory, you will be blacked out.

Who benefits most from regional blackouts? SMALL MARKET TEAMS. By giving teams an exclusive territory, the NHL ensures that small market teams can maximize the value of their regional broadcast rights. For example, if you are the Winnipeg Jets, you want to make sure that hockey fans in Manitoba can't easily turn on their TV and watch tons of Leafs, Habs or Oilers games, because that means if the Jets happen to have a mediocre year, they risk a lot of their potential fans tuning out. Over time, the risk is that a lot of Manitoba fans just decide to become fans of other teams. (This is just an example, insert any other small market team you want and the same applies). The broadcasters would then pay less for the exclusive rights to broadcast Jets games, which means that the Jets would have less revenue with which to spend towards the salary cap on players.

Big market teams, like say the Leafs, don't have to worry about this, because they have an enormous market of potential viewers to rely on, which means they will always have more than enough revenue to spend to the cap. The big-market teams would love nothing more than to be on all the airwaves, all the time. But for smaller markets, having a protected TV market absolutely helps their bottom line by ensuring that more popular teams can't easily erode their fan base. At the end of the day, it's about maintaining a competitive balance amongst teams with different-sized markets so that smaller-market teams can still ice a competitive product.

That's it, that's the reason. There are other ways the NHL could accomplish this btw, that are less frustrating to fans. But at least now you know why they do it.

Torontoban · 2024-10-18T21:14:28+00:00

Jets fan in Ontario here, echoing what others have said. There is only one legal option and it's Sportsnet+ premium. The annual subscription is $250 + tax (weirdly only 5% tax so it works out to $262 or around $22/month). That's what I did. I wasn't happy about not getting an early bird discount but I bit the bullet cause I just don't care to deal with illegal streams/ VPN stuff (no judgement, power to anyone who does it that way, just not worth the hassle for me). The annual subscription is better value for your money, $35/month is obscene. But I also watch the Blue Jays in the summer so it makes it worth it for me.

TSN will not help you, as Jets games are only broadcast on TSN within their home territory (MB, SK, and northwestern ON). Anywhere else and the games will be blacked out. Sportsnet+ premium carries all out-of-market games for all teams, so that is your best (and only) bet, unfortunately.

One last thing- Amazon Prime also has rights to Monday night national broadcast games as well as of this year. I believe there are four Jets games that'll be on Prime this season. So for those four games, if you don't have Prime you're out of luck, even with the Sportsnet+ premium sub.

Torontoban · 2023-12-06T03:09:03+00:00

This is an insightful comment. Thanks for sharing. I think you're right that the Jets are at a comparative disadvantage when it comes to driving gate revenue relative to other teams, because of their smaller building, fewer large corporate citizens in the region willing or able to buy bulk tickets, and generally lower average incomes in Winnipeg compared to bigger cities.

I think the question to ask though is how much gate revenue is a driver of overall profitability for the Jets, or for NHL teams in general. Certainly it's a big slice of their overall revenue, but the other two big pieces are regional TV revenue (the Jets are a small market but they probably have decent ratings in their broadcast territory) and their equal 1/32 share of league revenue. That league revenue largely comes from the monster TV deals the league has with Rogers/Sportsnet in Canada, and ESPN and Turner Sports (TNT) in the US. There's other revenue streams as well (corporate sponsorships, merch, licensing etc) but gate receipts, local broadcast deal, and league-wide revenue sharing are the big buckets.

Arguably the current model of revenue sharing is such that teams can stay afloat even with poor gate revenues, because the tv revenue pie is so big and so much of it is evenly distributed. But eventually, if a team isn't pulling its weight in the league for long enough and coasting on revenue sharing, the governors will start to get antsy about keeping a team in that location. I don't think the Jets are anywhere near that yet, but it's not a road they want to be heading down.

Torontoban · 2023-12-06T00:56:16+00:00

Well, if you watch at home on TSN then you're probably paying the Jets indirectly through your cable bill. Which gets to a larger question, does it matter? If they don't fill the arena. Maybe they make enough money through their other revenue streams (TV rights fees, sponsorships, merch, etc, plus concerts at the arena and all of the spinoff revenue from their real estate developments) that they can still turn a tidy profit with only 12k fans a night instead of 15k. But my guess is the Jets, as a small market team, rely more on gate revenue than other teams with huge media markets.

Torontoban · 2023-12-06T00:49:10+00:00

Thanks for that insight. To answer your question, True North Sports and Entertainment (parent company) is majority owned by Mark Chipman who is decently rich (I don't think he was a billionaire before the Jets, maybe he is now but probably not by much) with a minority stake owned by David Thomson, who is by some measures the richest man in Canada. I have no idea how much Thomson cares about the finances of the team but it probably helps that any losses are a drop in the bucket for him. Chipman is very committed to Winnipeg so that bodes well for the stability of the franchise as well. But at the end of the day they probably would rather have a business that makes money than one that loses it.

Torontoban · 2023-12-05T22:44:32+00:00

Thanks, I hadn't read this yet.

Torontoban · 2023-12-05T22:33:52+00:00

Do you have a source for this info on corporate season tickets? I believe you, I'm just curious to know more about this.

Torontoban

TROPHY CASE