<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mr. J @ Jan 15 2008, 04:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Jan 15 2008, 03:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>If and when a new MSG is built, then it will experience the same new stadium effect. Marketing driven, special event fanfare will be easy to keep up and you are fooling yourself if you think the rich and powerful give it a second thought about getting from Brooklyn to the hot spots in Manhattan. Yankee Stadium isn't on Manhattan island either.</div> I said that to point out what MSG lacks in amenities it makes up for with its surroundings. The rich and powerful are not the only ones who attend basketball games. And what are these new amenities you are talking about? What is the relevance of Yankee stadium?</div> The surroundings don't mean anything to the in-game amenities which is what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the creature comforts inside the arenas. People want to be catered to. The point about Yankee stadium is that being outside of Manhattan doesn't stop people from going to the game and then making it back to party in Manhattan. The same applies to Brooklyn. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>None of this is about the oncourt product of basketball. It is about people spending entertainment dollars on basketball. People will not only get more for their dollar at Barclays than they will at MSG, but they will be well informed of that fact. Marketing is a powerful force.</div> MSG is still the world's most famous arena. People know that and regardless of how behind they are amenities-wise, there is still something that attracts people from all over the world to this stadium. People know that. I don't think Barclay's or any other new arena can compete with that fact. The Barclay's celebration seems to be something temporary. After the first couple of seasons when the fanfare is over, how alluring will it be? And basketball has a lot to do with this. If the Nets are struggling much like their rivals across the river, expect attendance to dip regardless of how new the arena is. </div> I'm talking about the first couple of seasons. It doesn't take much to build a habit and the Nets will be focusing on getting people to the arena. This "war" is about the first couple of seasons. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Not even close to what I'm saying and there is no need to invent strawmen in this discussion.</div> It's far from strawman. My point is this: the Nets won't have as much money or as many fans than the Knicks. They will be second to the Knicks. They might take some fair-weather fans away from us or our ticket sales might decline, but they will not be New York's team. And those same fair-weather fans will hop on the Knicks bandwagon when the Knicks become better than they are. I'm sorry if the previous post sounded like sarcasm. That's not the direction I'm aiming for. </div> You are focused on this New York's team concept, but this is first and foremost about the corporate dollars. The corporate dollars in ticket sales have direct correlation to marketing partnerships and sponsorship deals. Brooklyn has a large population and for most Nets fans, Barclays will be much easier to get to. People underestimate how many fans the Nets have because of attendance in the swamp. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Thanks, really, I had no idea</div> Again, not sarcasm. My point is in three years we don't know what will be of either team in three years, so the fact that Isiah is a moron is irrelevant. He probably won't even be here anyway. </div> From the moment the Nets move into their new arena the base media coverage of the two teams will be the same. That goes from national to local media. After that, what matters is the corporate dollars. Playing for the Knicks or playing for the Nets won't mean one bit of difference is media attention, but there is the endorsement dollar consideration and that is what comes from this "war." The endorsements follow the corporate dollars.
Mista J is in some serious denial, that someone could touch *his* Knicks. Why do you care so much? Are you an investor? Do you have a vested interest? Seems like it. You act like Manhattan and Brooklyn are two totally different entities with no interaction, when that isn't true in the least. Five boroughs? Hello? Are you telling me that the Knicks fan base is as strong as it was when they went to the finals and were a mainstay in the Eastern Conference Race in the 90's? I doubt that. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>As for Kid Chocolate, if you don't have anything constructive to say you can either not say anything at all, or continue fondling with your rusty spoons.</div> I can say the same about you, minus the rusty spoons (unless you're into that too, let's get together, a/s/l?), with your ridiculously verbose posts.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Jan 15 2008, 05:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mr. J @ Jan 15 2008, 04:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Jan 15 2008, 03:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>If and when a new MSG is built, then it will experience the same new stadium effect. Marketing driven, special event fanfare will be easy to keep up and you are fooling yourself if you think the rich and powerful give it a second thought about getting from Brooklyn to the hot spots in Manhattan. Yankee Stadium isn't on Manhattan island either.</div> I said that to point out what MSG lacks in amenities it makes up for with its surroundings. The rich and powerful are not the only ones who attend basketball games. And what are these new amenities you are talking about? What is the relevance of Yankee stadium?</div> The surroundings don't mean anything to the in-game amenities which is what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the creature comforts inside the arenas. People want to be catered to. The point about Yankee stadium is that being outside of Manhattan doesn't stop people from going to the game and then making it back to party in Manhattan. The same applies to Brooklyn. </div> I don't understand how Barclay's will cater to the Nets' fans comfort needs more than MSG. The city itself is MSG's amenity. What specific amenities? There is no baseball team in Manhattan, so whether or not convenience plays a role remains to be seen. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>I'm talking about the first couple of seasons. It doesn't take much to build a habit and the Nets will be focusing on getting people to the arena. This "war" is about the first couple of seasons.</div> I was under the impression it was more than just a couple of seasons. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>You are focused on this New York's team concept, but this is first and foremost about the corporate dollars. The corporate dollars in ticket sales have direct correlation to marketing partnerships and sponsorship deals.</div> Still, it's hard to imagine most of these Manhattan-based corporations stop their tradition, or "habit" of buying Knick season tickets for decades. If anything, they will buy season tickets for both teams. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Brooklyn has a large population and for most Nets fans, Barclays will be much easier to get to. People underestimate how many fans the Nets have because of attendance in the swamp.</div> I don't think it will be easier commuting to a different state. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>From the moment the Nets move into their new arena the base media coverage of the two teams will be the same. That goes from national to local media. After that, what matters is the corporate dollars. Playing for the Knicks or playing for the Nets won't mean one bit of difference is media attention, but there is the endorsement dollar consideration and that is what comes from this "war." The endorsements follow the corporate dollars.</div> Regardless, the Knicks will make more and will be worth more. They will be what the Mets are to the Yankees.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kid Chocolate @ Jan 15 2008, 05:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Mista J is in some serious denial, that someone could touch *his* Knicks. Why do you care so much? Are you an investor? Do you have a vested interest? Seems like it.</div> Yes. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>You act like Manhattan and Brooklyn are two totally different entities with no interaction, when that isn't true in the least. Five boroughs? Hello?</div> Never said that. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Are you telling me that the Knicks fan base is as strong as it was when they went to the finals and were a mainstay in the Eastern Conference Race in the 90's? I doubt that.</div> Doesn't matter - they're still one of the league's best. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>I can say the same about you, minus the rusty spoons (unless you're into that too, let's get together, a/s/l?), with your ridiculously verbose posts.</div> You're so funny.
