Contraction a necessary evil for survival of NHL says economist
View Single Post
11-30-2012, 10:27 AM
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Between the Pipes
Originally Posted by
New hockey fans don't appear out of thin air. You can easily tap out every 'hockey city' capable of supporting an NHL team sans revenue sharing and have a 10 or 15 team league. That's not what the business is about.
You take the strengths of the big markets, use it to help smaller markets
and in the end everyone wins. It's the whole 'growing the game' argument that people like to ignore.
I believe what you mean to say is... You take the strengths of the hockey markets, and use it to help the non-hockey markets. "Big" and "small" aren't the correct terms. Not saying it's a bad idea to try and grow the game this way, just the terminology is wrong.
Last year in the NHL a city of 700,000 people made a profit of $13.3M, while a city of 6,000,000 people lost ~$20M. Who exactly is the big market and who is the small market? The city of 700,000 is considered by the general press and NHL to be a small market, where the city of 6,000,000 is considered to be a big market ( untapped, but big ). So it's not the "big" helping the "small".
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by cbcwpg