View Single Post
Old
02-05-2013, 12:46 PM
  #24
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
 
Beukeboom Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 12,352
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 a team in PHX is the opportunity to grow the game in AZ.
Just to provide a counterpoint though - I think you REALLY have to look at the attendance/ratings through the filter that their team has been without an owner for 3+ years, and is continually rumored to be moving to QC/TOR/Seattle, etc. That has a HUGE impact on fan involvement, because people don't want to invest (either $'s or emotionally) to a team that is potentially going to be playing somewhere else.

I've been to several games at Glendale (parent retired in the area), and it's a great place to catch a game, and the attendance was always pretty good when I've been there. I really hope they can find an owner with a long term vision, and significant financial resources to cover the losses until the growth happens.

Just my $.02 - but the real failure of the NHL was to allow "flawed" ownership groups for many of the expansion franchises (TB, PHO, ATL, CLM) which has really hindered those organizations becoming successful. The potential owners showed interest, and their check apparently cleared the bank, so that was good enough. Now the NHL is paying (or already paid) for those mistakes.

Beukeboom Fan is offline   Reply With Quote