View Single Post
11-05-2012, 01:11 AM
Registered User
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Orleans
Country: United States
Posts: 4,921
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by JetsFlyHigh View Post
The thing is, as a HOCKEY fan, I know where hockey works and hockey doesn't or if it does work, its not an NHL team fit in that market, but a lower caliber AHL team.
That's ridiculous to me. Fundamentally, there's little difference between Dallas, Atlanta, Phoenix or Miami. Top 10 markets, Four Sport Cities, Warm weather, non-traditional.

You know why we say "hockey works in Dallas, but it doesn't in ATL, PHX and FLA" ? Because Dallas was managed well, won, and built a fan base. People say hockey "failed" in ATL and PHX because the owners didn't care/weren't smart enough to make make it work. In Florida, people say it's "failing" because the owners care enough to try (unlike PHX/ATL) but haven't really won much.

You know where hockey works? Everywhere. Cause hockey is awesome. You know where hockey "fails"? Where owners mismanage franchise and fail to create fans.

Originally Posted by JetsFlyHigh View Post
Goes back to the Cuba soccer scene vs NYC soccer scene, sure NY could draw lots of fans, but does it match a soccer nation? Nope. Culture and location is looked at first, before money and potential. Thats how you grow a business.
Culture and location? No, just location. The same principle here with the NHL in non-traditional markets is the same principle at work with soccer critics. Tons of idiots say stupid things like "Americans don't care about soccer."

Which is the bigger soccer country: USA or Portugal? Portugal, duh. But which country had higher TV ratings for the 2010 World Cup for their country's matches? USA trounced Portugal in viewers. The US three matches in 2010 averaged 11.1 million viewers. Data is unavailabel for Portugal, but it's under 10.6, because they only have 10.57 million people.

The simple fact is that expanding into non-traditional markets created more new NHL fans.

Location is all that matters. By the logic that you NEED existing culture for a product to be successful would be like saying "there's no reason to sell personal computers or cell phones to anyone outside the markets that had hockey in 1990. It's just a bunch of farmers and ranchers. What do they need cell phones and PCs for?"

You don't need culture, you need people. You go to where the people are, because a good product changes the culture.

KevFu is offline   Reply With Quote