View Single Post
Old
02-05-2013, 08:07 AM
  #10
Kaoz
Ima Krejciist.
 
Kaoz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,580
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Ladd View Post
I think that if a team can't put butts in the seats they should be moved.

That's great that they're the 12th largest TV market, but the ratings are abysmal. They average 9,000 viewers a game. By comparison, the Bruins averaged a 4.7 rating, which I believe is over 110,000 viewers/game. (And that number is dwarfed by Canadian teams.)

It's also my understanding that the league gets the majority of their revenues from ticket sales, not TV. If you can go from a rink that operates at 50% capacity to one that sells out every game then the league's revenues will grow.

To me, the only real benefit of keeping the team there is the opportunity to grow the game in AZ.
They do, and that's a problem they're actively trying to change with the Southern market strategy. Getting kids involved in hockey is the first step. More kids involved means more fans as both the child and the parent have to take an interest in the sport. While the parent club may suffer on the bottom line, the hockey camps and promotions they put on build a stronger future. They need to be committed enough to see that through though else it's all for not.

You can't grow the sport if you don't venture into those non traditional markets and in order to do so you must be willing to take a beating at first. The same thing happened in Carolina when they first joined the league, and they've been quite successful growing the sport there:
http://www.canescountry.com/2009/5/1...alue-growth-is

Phoenix was a reach when the NHL placed a franchise there, no doubt. So much has been invested in them now though it only makes sense to keep them there if possible. I also wonder if NBC would take issue with the NHL relocating a team from the sunbelt back to Canada after their latest broadcast contract.

Kaoz is offline   Reply With Quote