View Single Post
01-05-2013, 03:51 PM
TaketheCannoli's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 8,404
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.

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 have to wonder about a post so full of incorrect information. Is this based upon some discussion you had over a beer with some person who plays fast and loose with facts?

Go research Columbus's ratings compared to the rest of US markets.While you are at it, go research what years they made a profit, what years they lost and how many times they chose to forgo revenue sharing?

If you can't answer those questions, you aren't dealing with relevant data.

I can only assume you didn't actually listen to Bill Watters on Prime Time Sports. I did. I listen to PTS most days. He was on the round-table December 14th.

Here is what he said, "I'm not sure and Damon and John can correct me, but I heard six NHL teams lost an average of $35 million and twelve teams were between break even and losing $20 million.Then eight teams made 300 million combined, but half of that profit was the Leafs."

John, "Eighteen teams lost money."

Bill, "Ok eighteen teams lost money and four broke even.Only eight are profitable. "

Now I generally take anything Watters days with a grain of salt because of statements like that going back to when he co-hosted with McCown 20 years ago, or Leafs Lunch or The Bill Watters Show when they were on 640.

Last edited by TaketheCannoli: 01-05-2013 at 03:58 PM.
TaketheCannoli is offline   Reply With Quote