HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   The Business of Hockey (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=124)
-   -   Forbes: "...hockey, not basketball, would seem to be our preferred winter sport." (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1450597)

Fugu 06-20-2013 02:51 PM

Forbes: "...hockey, not basketball, would seem to be our preferred winter sport."
 
In terms of what people are willing to pay at the box office, in spite of a 14.7 vs 4..8 rating:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jesselaw...inals-tickets/
Quote:

Despite Higher TV Ratings For NBA, NHL Dominates Postseason Box Office

Ticket prices, however, tell another story. Ticket prices for the NBA finals are at a 3-year high, averaging $941 for the Heat vs. Spurs series. This ranks a distant second to the Celtics vs. Lakers series in 2010, which averaged $1,805. Over the last three years, only one Stanley Cup final–the 2012 Devils vs. Kings– has had an average price lower than the price for this years NBA finals. In the 2011, the Bruins vs. Canucks series had an average price of $1,437, almost double the price $758 for the Heat’s first Finals appearance vs. the Mavericks.

A Cup final ticket is 46% higher than an NBA final, at $2097 in Chicago vs $1512.

Quote:

“Hockey teams have relatively consistent demand all year, while NBA demand is much more impacted by star visits,” says Nima Moayedi, CEO of Razorgator, a leading secondary ticket seller.
I think this fits in with the NHL demographics most BOH readers understand-- affluent, techy, and more highly educated fans than the other leagues.


Quote:


While the stars are more visible at NBA games, both on the court and in the stands, the day-in-day-out demand for NHL is significantly higher than the NBA. The average price for tickets across the NHL in 2013 was 18.6% higher than in the NBA–$147 vs. $123. In the NHL, 16 of 32 teams filled their venues at or over 100% capacity for the season. In the NBA, only six teams could say the same. As a country, we covet speed and power above all else. With 100-mile hour slapshots and two hundred pound men skating at over 20 miles-per-hour, hockey, not basketball, would seem to be our preferred winter sport. Based on the ultimate measure of demand—what people are willing to pay to see it live–that appears to be the case.

apice3* 06-20-2013 03:06 PM

I would argue that it strictly depends on who is playing.

Who's going to charge more for a finals ticket: Rangers or Hornets?

Who's going to charge more for a finals ticket: Coyotes or Lakers?

The more prolific teams have been in the Cup finals the last few years: Boston, Philly, Chicago, Detroit, Pittsburgh, etc. No surprise the one NHL cheaper ticket was Devils/Kings, two smaller markets.

IU Hawks fan 06-20-2013 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by apice3 (Post 67749525)
I would argue that it strictly depends on who is playing.

Who's going to charge more for a finals ticket: Rangers or Hornets?

Who's going to charge more for a finals ticket: Coyotes or Lakers?

The more prolific teams have been in the Cup finals the last few years: Boston, Philly, Chicago, Detroit, Pittsburgh, etc. No surprise the one NHL cheaper ticket was Devils/Kings, two smaller markets.

That does nothing to change the fact that NBA regular season attendance is awful when compared to the NHL's.

Fugu 06-20-2013 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by apice3 (Post 67749525)
I would argue that it strictly depends on who is playing.

Who's going to charge more for a finals ticket: Rangers or Hornets?

Who's going to charge more for a finals ticket: Coyotes or Lakers?

The more prolific teams have been in the Cup finals the last few years: Boston, Philly, Chicago, Detroit, Pittsburgh, etc. No surprise the one NHL cheaper ticket was Devils/Kings, two smaller markets.

Of course, that's a valid point. Nevertheless, the average numbers are compelling, since both leagues have teams in similar locations, for the major cities anyway:
The average price for tickets across the NHL in 2013 was 18.6% higher than in the NBA–$147 vs. $123. In the NHL, 16 of 32 teams filled their venues at or over 100% capacity for the season. In the NBA, only six teams could say the same.

tarheelhockey 06-20-2013 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by apice3 (Post 67749525)
I would argue that it strictly depends on who is playing.

I think the article's point is that the question "who is playing?" is much more important in the NBA than the NHL.

Asif16* 06-20-2013 03:28 PM

Even though the NHL finals and NBA finals wasnt played on the same days.....i think with the NBA being over tonight....NHL should recieve higher ratings for its final 3 games. All three games will be on NBC as well.

NHL Finals should be the only major sporting event going on until next week. We already know there will be 2 more games without any interference from anything else.

As a hockey fan in general living in the states...heres hoping it goes to a game 7. It would be the finishing tough on a very succesfull short year for NBC and NHL.

Game 7 of this series has the ability to draw 10+ mill fans. Would be unreal for the NHL's popularity.

maroon 6 06-20-2013 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fugu (Post 67749991)
Of course, that's a valid point. Nevertheless, the average numbers are compelling, since both leagues have teams in similar locations, for the major cities anyway:
The average price for tickets across the NHL in 2013 was 18.6% higher than in the NBA–$147 vs. $123. In the NHL, 16 of 32 teams filled their venues at or over 100% capacity for the season. In the NBA, only six teams could say the same.

There are 30 teams in the NHL.

The Korean* 06-20-2013 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IU Hawks fan (Post 67749949)
That does nothing to change the fact that NBA regular season attendance is awful when compared to the NHL's.

Thats what happens when you only have two or three teams with legit shot at winning the NBA title.

IU Hawks fan 06-20-2013 03:36 PM

Yup.

The NBA is a terrible product until the conference finals.

Fugu 06-20-2013 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maroon 6 (Post 67750509)
There are 30 teams in the NHL.


I know that! Lol.

I think the Forbes' writer forgot to translate back to the NHL 30 vs NBA 32.

maroon 6 06-20-2013 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fugu (Post 67750797)
I know that! Lol.

I think the Forbes' writer forgot to translate back to the NHL 30 vs NBA 32.

Haha NBA has 30 as well. NFL has 32 :P

tarheelhockey 06-20-2013 04:10 PM

For the sake of illustration, here's how the NHL and NBA break down in terms of "winning" their shared and non-shared markets:

Shared markets

CityGross Att.Percent Att.Avg. ticket
BostonNBA - 18,624tie - 100%NBA - $72.96
ChicagoNBA - 21,876NHL - 110.4%NBA - $62.88
DallasNBA - 20,036NBA - 104.4%NBA - $51.80
DenverNBA - 17,819NBA - 93%NBA - $54.23
DetroitNHL - 20,066NHL - 100%NHL - $53.28
Los AngelesNBA - 19,226 (LAC)NBA - 100.9% (LAC)NBA - $100.25 (LAL)
MiamiNBA - 19,982NBA - 102%NBA - $72.50
New York (NYK/NYR)NBA - 19,033NHL - 100%NBA - $123.22
MinneapolisNHL - 18,794NHL - 104.7NHL - $62.63
PhiladelphiaNHL - 19,786NHL - 101.3%NHL - $71.59
PhoenixNBA - 15,436NBA - 83.8%NBA - $57.28
TorontoNHL - 19,426NHL - 103.2%NHL - $124.69
WashingtonNHL - 17,734NHL - 95.8%NHL - $73.75


It would appear the NBA has a slight edge in large markets, though it is pretty close. Boston and Chicago are both pretty close to a dead heat with an NBA edge in prices, the NBA wins New York by virtue of massive ticket prices, and they split the other cities 5/5 -- in part because Phoenix is slightly less bad for the NBA than for the NHL.

But the non-shared markets go decisively toward the NHL:

Ticket price:

TeamPrice
Winnipeg$97.84
Vancouver$87.38
Montreal$78.56
Edmonton$79.29
Pittsburgh$67.52
Calgary$66.35
NY Islanders$65.21
Nashville$60.44
San Antonio$58.45
Brooklyn$55.89
Florida$55.75
San Jose$51.47
Milwaukee$48.71
Portland$48.40
New Jersey$48.06
Columbus$47.95
Carolina$47.89
Oklahoma City$47.15
Cleveland$47.15


I've been interrupted and won't have time to finish the table, but in the <$47 range there are 15 NBA teams to only 6 NHL teams. Not only does the NHL have the massive advantage of Canadian support, but outside of Canada the NHL is still pulling higher prices in non-contested markets. Even the Coyotes have higher prices than 9 NBA markets. You can confirm from the attendance charts that the NHL wins that area as well, largely on the basis of Canadian support.

Sources:

http://espn.go.com/nhl/attendance
http://espn.go.com/nba/attendance
http://www.fancostexperience.com/pag...020_pdf001.pdf
http://www.businessinsider.com/avera...the-day-2013-2

IU Hawks fan 06-20-2013 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tarheelhockey (Post 67751893)
For the sake of illustration, here's how the NHL and NBA break down in terms of "winning" their shared and non-shared markets:

Shared markets

CityGross Att.Percent Att.Avg. ticket
BostonNBA - 18,624tie - 100%NBA - $72.96
ChicagoNBA - 21,876NHL - 110.4%NBA - $62.88
DallasNBA - 20,036NBA - 104.4%NBA - $51.80
DenverNBA - 17,819NBA - 93%NBA - $54.23
DetroitNHL - 20,066NHL - 100%NHL - $53.28
Los AngelesNBA - 19,226 (LAC)NBA - 100.9% (LAC)NBA - $100.25 (LAL)
MiamiNBA - 19,982NBA - 102%NBA - $72.50
New York (NYK/NYR)NBA - 19,033NHL - 100%NBA - $123.22
MinneapolisNHL - 18,794NHL - 104.7NHL - $62.63
PhiladelphiaNHL - 19,786NHL - 101.3%NHL - $71.59
PhoenixNBA - 15,436NBA - 83.8%NBA - $57.28
TorontoNHL - 19,426NHL - 103.2%NHL - $124.69
WashingtonNHL - 17,734NHL - 95.8%NHL - $73.75


It would appear the NBA has a slight edge in large markets, though it is pretty close. Boston and Chicago are both pretty close to a dead heat with an NBA edge in prices, the NBA wins New York by virtue of massive ticket prices, and they split the other cities 5/5 -- in part because Phoenix is slightly less bad for the NBA than for the NHL.

It's silly to look at face value when comparing ticket prices. Hawks prices on the secondary market dwarfed the Bulls, and that's what gives us the best representation of demand.

Outside of games against the Heat, you could get into just about any Bulls game for $30-40. Very rare to find Hawks tickets for under $80.

I'd be surprised if it wasn't similar in Boston.

tarheelhockey 06-20-2013 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IU Hawks fan (Post 67752123)
It's silly to look at face value when comparing ticket prices. Hawks prices on the secondary market dwarfed the Bulls, and that's what gives us the best representation of demand.

Outside of games against the Heat, you could get into just about any Bulls game for $30-40. Very rare to find Hawks tickets for under $80.

I'd be surprised if it wasn't similar in Boston.

That's fine and well if we're talking about "soft" measures of popularity, but the hard data shows that the Bulls sold a larger number of tickets at a higher cost than the Blackhawks. To the best of my knowledge, there is no database of average secondary-market cost. Anecdotal evidence is interesting, and I believe it, but how do we know it's really accurate?

Also, it's noteworthy that there's still that "except games against the Heat" qualifier which parallels the larger point here -- the NBA has a higher ceiling than the NHL, but that ceiling is only reached by a small number of teams. The NHL as a whole seems to have greater pull.

CanadianHockey 06-20-2013 05:21 PM

Agreed with IU. An arena that's selling tickets at higher prices but not reaching 100% capacity might actually be 'worse' than one with slightly lower ticket prices that consistently sells out, in the sense that we don't actually know just how much the sold out venue can charge per ticket before its attendance declines to match the more expensive venue.

Fugu 06-20-2013 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maroon 6 (Post 67751395)
Haha NBA has 30 as well. NFL has 32 :P


:facepalm:

I give up on the other leagues. I do KNOW the NHL only has 30... for now. :laugh:

KevFu 06-20-2013 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by apice3 (Post 67749525)
The more prolific teams have been in the Cup finals the last few years: Boston, Philly, Chicago, Detroit, Pittsburgh, etc. No surprise the one NHL cheaper ticket was Devils/Kings, two smaller markets.

I'm not disagreeing with you, but Los Angeles and New York Metro are two smaller markets? Smaller than what, Tokyo and Sao Paulo?

metalfoot 06-20-2013 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevFu (Post 67755865)
I'm not disagreeing with you, but Los Angeles and New York Metro are two smaller markets? Smaller than what, Tokyo and Sao Paulo?

Smaller in the sense of the relative profile and interest in hockey?

KevFu 06-20-2013 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by metalfoot (Post 67758849)
Smaller in the sense of the relative profile and interest in hockey?

Try again.

I think the phrase you're looking for is "two markets with split fan bases" or "two smaller fan bases" and not "two smaller markets."

tarheelhockey 06-20-2013 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CanadianHockey (Post 67754089)
Agreed with IU. An arena that's selling tickets at higher prices but not reaching 100% capacity might actually be 'worse' than one with slightly lower ticket prices that consistently sells out, in the sense that we don't actually know just how much the sold out venue can charge per ticket before its attendance declines to match the more expensive venue.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but I don't see the relevance. All we are looking at here is ticket sales.

IU Hawks fan 06-20-2013 09:04 PM

Another thing is, selling a larger number of tickets is pretty irrelevant in the Bulls-Hawks case with both selling over 100% capacity, because that comes down to the UC having a higher capacity for basketball.

The Hawks were at 110%, the Bulls at 104%. If the Hawks had more to sell, they would have. But the low demand for Bulls tickets on the secondary market shows that their ceiling if they had more to sell is probably not much more.

http://espn.go.com/nhl/attendance
http://espn.go.com/nba/attendance

tarheelhockey 06-21-2013 09:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IU Hawks fan (Post 67761921)
Another thing is, selling a larger number of tickets is pretty irrelevant in the Bulls-Hawks case with both selling over 100% capacity, because that comes down to the UC having a higher capacity for basketball.

The Hawks were at 110%, the Bulls at 104%. If the Hawks had more to sell, they would have. But the low demand for Bulls tickets on the secondary market shows that their ceiling if they had more to sell is probably not much more.

http://espn.go.com/nhl/attendance
http://espn.go.com/nba/attendance


I'm not saying you're wrong about demand on the secondary market, but these two key facts are still true:

- The Bulls sell slightly more tickets
- Bulls tickets cost almost 15% more


I included the percentage column in the original chart specifically to illustrate that in cases like Chicago (also Boston and NYC) the NBA seating capacity is the sole reason for the larger gross numbers. That point is not being ignored -- but the fact of the matter is that, regardless of short-term trends on the secondary market, the Bulls are able to peg the face value of their tickets at a substantially higher price than the Blackhawks.

And if we're being completely honest here, bandwagoning likely accounts for a large part of the secondary-market discrepancy. The Bulls went from consecutive conference championships to 5th place and a second-round exit. The Hawks had one of the best regular seasons in history and are in the Finals. If we had objective secondary-market data from the past several years, it would be helpful to know whether the current snapshot matches historical trends -- but that data doesn't exist, and even the extent to which we can talk about it here is purely anecdotal.

Melrose Munch 06-21-2013 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by krnboy1009 (Post 67750679)
Thats what happens when you only have two or three teams with legit shot at winning the NBA title.

Quote:

Originally Posted by IU Hawks fan (Post 67750767)
Yup.

The NBA is a terrible product until the conference finals.

Why do you guys bring this up for sports? The majority of american has no interest in nashville vs carolina or cleveland vs okc. It's common knowledge that Chicago, Boston, NYC, Phila, LA, sometimes DC always draw higher and always bring in the ratings. The goal is to make money and NYC and Chicago make more.

The CyNick 06-21-2013 09:36 AM

which league generates the most revenue, that's the league that is more popular.

Morris Wanchuk 06-21-2013 10:19 AM

If star visits are so important, good thing the NHL changed their schedule to make that happen! :sarcasm:


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:43 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.