Richard Peddie says NHL lacks financial transparency
View Single Post
11-18-2013, 02:17 AM
Join Date: Dec 2012
Originally Posted by
If the goal of the NHL is to further develop hockey, then of course contraction would hurt. That said, I really just approached this from more of a numbers game vs personal feeling or preferences. I love hockey, obviously, and I don't mind the idea that more people might discover it and become as big fans as most of here are. The dollars and cents of it have to make sense.
You can't just keep adding teams if you can't find the right things that make it viable
-- and viability does mean coexisting financially with the existing teams.
It's not that cut and dry, I agree. I ran a back of the napkin kind of exercise to illustrate how top heavy the NHL is in terms of where the revenue is derived. There is some return on an investment the NHL is counting on, and sometimes that's not very clear to me.
Right, I totally understand that. Obviously adding more teams is great, to a point, where it will actually become detrimental. I'm really not sure where we're at. I think adding teams could actually harm the league, but removing teams could harm the league as well. It is certainly tough to manage a viable franchise in many markets, such as Nashville or Florida, but I hope it is successful. After all, I think you want hockey to succeed as much as I do.
That's true - I think the NHL often makes erroneous assumptions, which can pan out, but often do harm to the league. I appreciate your response though - I see you post in such subjects and really respect your opinion more than most.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by CanadianSharks