View Single Post
01-05-2013, 01:43 PM
Mayor Bee
Mayor Bee's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 15,070
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Gump Hasek View Post
I didn't claim to "have access to ticket revenue numbers throughout history" so am unsure of your point; conversely, I did however point out that your use of attendance as a somehow meaningful indicator of forward viability qualifies as extraneous at best. Hope that helps. The balance of your reply here seems a bit of non sequitur as well.

For example, the television ratings in Austin for an unrelated Olympic game is largely irrelevant to an NHL attendance/revenue discussion or for that matter its forward viability as an NHL market - especially given that it isn't one. Let us instead focus instead upon actual NHL markets for this discussion.

You've posted the Olympic game ratings for Columbus already; a more meaningful number however would be if you posted the ratings of the Blue Jackets games instead. Why not post those, and rather than cherry picking and selectively choosing a playoff game, why not just post their raw annual ratings numbers for the regular season, and then post that number up against markets that draw meaningful ratings? That would provide some actual true context to any ratings and or viability discussion as it speaks to viability relative to the group - as their ratings at least imply their ability to generate meaningful local revenue. Raw attendance sans context does not.
You're erroneously assuming that local TV ratings are inherently meaningful of whether a city is a hockey market or not. I've already addressed several reasons why it's not a great indicator under the best of circumstances. Central Ohio has multiple cable providers, who for whatever reason can choose to either show the games or else their own programming. None of them has a basic package that includes both Fox Sports Ohio (which has the contract) and Fox Sports Cincinnati (which occasionally is used as a backup). If one provider decides that they're putting Cleveland Cavaliers preseason games on FSO instead of regular-season CBJ games, that has an impact. If an early show runs late and they decide to not pick up the game broadcast until 2/3 of the way through the 2nd period, that has an impact. We have a thread on the CBJ board that deals with some of these very issues.

You know what Columbus does have? The third-largest adult league in the United States. Booming youth hockey, which just this morning saw two of its graduates win gold medals at the WJC. But if you'd rather focus on local TV ratings, be my guest. I can't force you to pull your own head out of the sand.

Bill Watters claimed when a guest on Prime Time Sports a few weeks ago that Columbus was one of three NHL teams that lost $35 million last season IIRC. If true, that is a number that doesn't seem likely to be cured by a minor increase to their annual league revenue sharing welfare payment... nor by the (realistically) minor improvement to their local lease. I'm guessing their franchise goal is to increase the amount of revenue generated per each ticket sold going forward, just as my analogy initially implied. Good luck.
I care not one bit about what Bill Watters has to say. For one thing, the CBJ have always been extremely tight with their financial information. For another, the "minor improvement" you refer to is estimated to save between $9-10 million per year.

Third, the way to increase the amount of revenue generated locally is by having on-ice success. To refer to Columbus as "not a hockey market" because that number is lower than it would ideally be right now is absolute lunacy, mostly because the implication is that people don't show up when the team is having success. This is quite clearly not the case. To say that Columbus has poor long-term prospects is flat-out stupid. To say that Columbus has no short-term prospects is stupid. To say that any current NHL city has no short-term or long-term prospects is stupid, because we've seen very clearly that people have absolutely no problem showing up...the reluctance to pay a massive price to watch a chronically poor on-ice product is perfectly logical, and not at all indicative of anything else except for a logical reaction to a poor product.

Mayor Bee is offline   Reply With Quote