View Single Post
01-05-2013, 01:59 PM
Gump Hasek
Spleen Merchant
Gump Hasek's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: 222 Tudor Terrace
Posts: 7,798
vCash: 2203
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
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.
So, you are basically admitting then that Columbus draws embarrassingly poor local NHL television ratings, especially relative to the majority of other NHL markets, just as I suspected. Those ratings speak directly to their ability to generate meaningful local advertising revenue BTW. I'm not interested in local excuses for those poor ratings either, just that the poor ratings indeed exist.

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.
Whether they win or not is irrelevant. All that matters is the revenue generated by the club relative to expense - profit/loss. If those revenues equate to annual losses that place them amongst the dregs relative to the balance of the group, and especially when coming after the receipt of annual league welfare, then by extension it is logical to at least question their viability going forward. To ignore this speaks directly to the placement of one's head in the sand.

I have work to do now; carry on without me.

Last edited by Gump Hasek: 01-05-2013 at 02:14 PM. Reason: spelling
Gump Hasek is offline   Reply With Quote