The Business of HockeyDiscuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Franchise sales, valuations, TV contracts, ratings, expansion, relocation, the CBA and work stoppage discussion goes here.
Holy cow.... knew that the Hawks were setting local ratings records, but had no clue they were up 68%. That's stunning, even with the points streak.
lets be honest here.. shouldn't the hawks tomorrow vs SJ get a 23.4 rating intstead of 6?? if chicago is now a hockey town because of this start, then i think anything less than 23.4 would be a disppointment. here is why... they are playing at home on a fri night, no work next day, vs a good team (sj).. and most important, they are going for the all time NHL record.. 100 yr record.. i know if this was happening in montreal on a fri night, the whole province would be watching. we might even get a 64.3 rating.. if i see tomorrow a 6.3 rating, i will think it's a disappointment. if the bears can get a 43.3 rating during reg season and they're .500, why cant the talk of town hawks who are going for an all time NHL record at home on a fri night get 20.0+. am i right here boys??
oh, and also, the bulls playing worst team in nba and that game will be over by the 1st period.. so it's the only show in Chicago tomorrow night..
lets be honest here.. shouldn't the hawks tomorrow vs SJ get a 23.4 rating intstead of 6?? if chicago is now a hockey town because of this start, then i think anything less than 23.4 would be a disppointment. here is why... they are playing at home on a fri night, no work next day, vs a good team (sj).. and most important, they are going for the all time NHL record.. 100 yr record.. i know if this was happening in montreal on a fri night, the whole province would be watching. we might even get a 64.3 rating.. if i see tomorrow a 6.3 rating, i will think it's a disappointment. if the bears can get a 43.3 rating during reg season and they're .500, why cant the talk of town hawks who are going for an all time NHL record at home on a fri night get 20.0+. am i right here boys??
oh, and also, the bulls playing worst team in nba and that game will be over by the 1st period.. so it's the only show in Chicago tomorrow night..
They'll be lucky to get a third of what you want.
People in the US actually like sports other than hockey. Shocking, I know.
People in the US actually like sports other than hockey. Shocking, I know.
i understand.. but this is not just any hockey game.. it's for the all time NHL record. also, it's not like there are other sports to compete with it. i just don't know why they would get their usual 6.3 for this.. this game is more special than all the first 16 games put together. at home on a fri night going for the all time record.. no other NHL team in its 100 yr existence has ever been in this same position as the Hawks tomorrow night, and it'll never happen again to the city of chicago. Look at L.A.. they could care less about hockey there, and i know this for a fact. they drew 0.3 for quite some time there.. yet last yr's stanley cup final, i think they drew like 13.7 or close to it. if L.A can draw that much for 1 game, chicago fans can all come out tomorrow night and watch this game. it's sorta big like a cup game.
i would really like to see at least an 11.3.. any of you think the hawks tomorrow can pull that??
i understand.. but this is not just any hockey game.. it's for the all time NHL record. also, it's not like there are other sports to compete with it. i just don't know why they would get their usual 6.3 for this.. this game is more special than all the first 16 games put together. at home on a fri night going for the all time record.. no other NHL team in its 100 yr existence has ever been in this same position as the Hawks tomorrow night, and it'll never happen again to the city of chicago. Look at L.A.. they could care less about hockey there, and i know this for a fact. they drew 0.3 for quite some time there.. yet last yr's stanley cup final, i think they drew like 13.7 or close to it. if L.A can draw that much for 1 game, chicago fans can all come out tomorrow night and watch this game. it's sorta big like a cup game.
i would really like to see at least an 11.3.. any of you think the hawks tomorrow can pull that??
I bet it will be between 6.5 and 7.8. I don't think people here really care about regular season hockey records. I honestly didn't even know tomorrow's game was "big" until I read your post. It's a regular season game on a night a lot of people go out. Just my humble opinion.
I bet it will be between 6.5 and 7.8. I don't think people here really care about regular season hockey records. I honestly didn't even know tomorrow's game was "big" until I read your post. It's a regular season game on a night a lot of people go out. Just my humble opinion.
They did peak at 10.91. I'd say less than 7.5 is disappointing. People obviously wanted to check out how they're doing, I would expect a spike for the actual record-breaker if they get an early lead.
The record is impressive, but ultimately not one many people really care about I don't think. Also, there's a reason why it's called the "Friday Night Death Slow." Fridays are not great for TV ratings.
lets be honest here.. shouldn't the hawks tomorrow vs SJ get a 23.4 rating intstead of 6?? if chicago is now a hockey town because of this start, then i think anything less than 23.4 would be a disppointment. here is why... they are playing at home on a fri night, no work next day, vs a good team (sj).. and most important, they are going for the all time NHL record.. 100 yr record.. i know if this was happening in montreal on a fri night, the whole province would be watching. we might even get a 64.3 rating.. if i see tomorrow a 6.3 rating, i will think it's a disappointment. if the bears can get a 43.3 rating during reg season and they're .500, why cant the talk of town hawks who are going for an all time NHL record at home on a fri night get 20.0+. am i right here boys??
oh, and also, the bulls playing worst team in nba and that game will be over by the 1st period.. so it's the only show in Chicago tomorrow night..
So.... if Chicago's a hockey town, they should get ratings that no hockey town gets?
lets be honest here.. shouldn't the hawks tomorrow vs SJ get a 23.4 rating intstead of 6?? if chicago is now a hockey town because of this start, then i think anything less than 23.4 would be a disppointment. here is why... they are playing at home on a fri night, no work next day, vs a good team (sj).. and most important, they are going for the all time NHL record.. 100 yr record.. i know if this was happening in montreal on a fri night, the whole province would be watching. we might even get a 64.3 rating.. if i see tomorrow a 6.3 rating, i will think it's a disappointment. if the bears can get a 43.3 rating during reg season and they're .500, why cant the talk of town hawks who are going for an all time NHL record at home on a fri night get 20.0+. am i right here boys??
oh, and also, the bulls playing worst team in nba and that game will be over by the 1st period.. so it's the only show in Chicago tomorrow night..
Chicago is a Winning BlackHawks town even in the darkest days of 7,000 or 8,000 at Chicago Stadium in late 1970's early 1980's or 6,000 or 7,000 at United Center late 1990's early 2000's. If the Hawks win, Chicago loves them but watching non-Hawks related hockey???? The ratings in Chicago have never stood out, so I would never call Chicago a HockeyTown but its better than New York or LA though.
well, i'll say this...if they got 10.91 peak last game. just imagine what it'll get with 5 min to go and hawks up 3-2, or even game tied 3-3.. and this time, not even a bulls game on at same time like last time. can you see a peak of 14.9?? i can..
just pretend it's your team.. lets say you're a flyer fan, or a leaf fan, or a caps fan.. and tomorrow night, your team takes the ice vs sj for the all time best start in NHL history. you tell me you won't be counting the minutes from this second? i would be freaking out now and and pacing the room. It just has to be like this in chicago now..
BTW boys, no one yet has found out what the flyers/pens rating was last night? it's still not out.. no one has yet posted it. if you see it, can you pls post it here. i am so anxious to see it. it's gotta be huge. easily easily easily, the best and most exciting game of the year in the NHL so far. lots of goals, rough stuff, comebacks, fights, it had it all.i just hope people all tuned in. It will gain a lot of new fans for sure.
I predict 900,000. just short of the BOS/NYR record this yr.
The game was the highest-rated in network history, drawing an 0.55 and 901,000 viewers. That makes it the second-most watched game ever on NBC Sports Network (which, as we all know, was VERSUS from 2006-2011 and OLN in 2005). Only January 23rd's Bruins vs. Rangers game (956,000) had more viewers. Wednesday Night Rivalry is now responsible for four of the five most-watched NBC Sports Network games ever.
Locals were, as they often are, the key to any high-rated NHL broadcast. In Pittsburgh, the game drew a 14.5 rating. That's slightly below the 15.0 for the Penguins game against Buffalo on Sunday, but it was the highest-rated NBCSN/VERSUS/OLN game ever in Pittsburgh, and the No. 1 television program on Wednesday night in the market, beating out, you know, American Idol and Modern Family and such. Similarly, in Philadelphia, the game drew a 4.84, a record on the network in that market. It was the No. 1 cable program on Wednesday in Philly.
It's nice to see that the numbers for the various teams/channels seems to be opposite what I wondered (and as an earlier poster posted the article-many "experts"). I honestly the lockout would be a crusher for viewing, yet it seems the opposite, with it seems alot of records being set/broken across the US.
What's the reasoning for this apparent 180 from what was expected? Where are these numbers coming from (as in, who is watching that wasn't watching as much before the lockout)?
It's nice to see that the numbers for the various teams/channels seems to be opposite what I wondered (and as an earlier poster posted the article-many "experts"). I honestly the lockout would be a crusher for viewing, yet it seems the opposite, with it seems alot of records being set/broken across the US.
What's the reasoning for this apparent 180 from what was expected? Where are these numbers coming from (as in, who is watching that wasn't watching as much before the lockout)?
The games mean more in this condensed season. Makes watching them seem important.
It's not like the NHL fell off the map. It was only 7 months from the SCF final to puck drop. Compare that to 04-05 lockout, which created a hockey void twice as long.
We saw the exact same thing happen to the NBA last year. When they finally came back from their lockout, their ratings went through the roof. Now, this season, the numbers have come down some, but they are still an improvement over the season prior the lockout. I predict a similar situation for the NHL. The fevered pace of a shortened campaign will bring in more viewers than usual, some casuals will get sucked in and stick around, but the overall numbers will descend back to their ordinary growth rate - 4 or 5% for '13-'14.
It's not like the NHL fell off the map. It was only 7 months from the SCF final to puck drop. Compare that to 04-05 lockout, which created a hockey void twice as long.
We saw the exact same thing happen to the NBA last year. When they finally came back from their lockout, their ratings went through the roof. Now, this season, the numbers have come down some, but they are still an improvement over the season prior the lockout. I predict a similar situation for the NHL. The fevered pace of a shortened campaign will bring in more viewers than usual, some casuals will get sucked in and stick around, but the overall numbers will descend back to their ordinary growth rate - 4 or 5% for '13-'14.
So enjoy it will it lasts.
The NBA's Christmas day season opener ratings were down significantly from Christmas day ratings the year before...
admittedly the increases weren't as high as the NHL's, but 10-11 was the NBA's best seasons ratings wise since 2002, and the lockout shortened season still improved on those numbers.
this year? back to where they were. If anything, they've declined from 10-11, and are certainly lower than 11-12.
The ratings in Chicago are staggering and it is causing concern with the NBA as the Hawks are scoring well on Chicago's affluent north shore.
I found it fascinating that Bill Wirtz KNEW not televising home games was wrong but he claimed that his farther (Arthur) made him promise he would not do it.
Ratings in Boston are also sky high this season.
The NHL will never surpass the NBA on a national level but in many head to head local markets hockey wins and in a few markets the NHL drove the NBA out ( Buffalo - St. Louis for example)
Bottom line is there is no fan backlash from the lockout in the hardcore hockey markets in the US.
The ratings in Chicago are staggering and it is causing concern with the NBA as the Hawks are scoring well on Chicago's affluent north shore.
I found it fascinating that Bill Wirtz KNEW not televising home games was wrong but he claimed that his farther (Arthur) made him promise he would not do it.
Ratings in Boston are also sky high this season.
The NHL will never surpass the NBA on a national level but in many head to head local markets hockey wins and in a few markets the NHL drove the NBA out ( Buffalo - St. Louis for example)
Bottom line is there is no fan backlash from the lockout in the hardcore hockey markets in the US.
Never is a long time.
If the NHL wants to succeed in the US, they need to make a concerted effort to attract hispanics kids to enroll in hockey. Easier said than done, but that is THE key demographic going forward. The NHL already has white viewers on lockdown. If they get hispanics, it's game over for the NBA. Depending on enrollment numbers, hispanics could do very well in hockey. The NBA, mainly due to the height issue, will likely never have a more diverse field of players, which could be its downfall.
If the NHL wants to succeed in the US, they need to make a concerted effort to attract hispanics kids to enroll in hockey. Easier said than done, but that is THE key demographic going forward. The NHL already has white viewers on lockdown. If they get hispanics, it's game over for the NBA. Depending on enrollment numbers, hispanics could do very well in hockey. The NBA, mainly due to the height issue, will likely never have a more diverse field of players, which could be its downfall.
Hockey has one major problem in attracting youth players - the cost of the game.
(the other problem is ice time)
Mike Grier is the classic example of an African-American who had parents willing to support his love of hockey.
The cost of being a hockey parent is definitely an issue, no question about it. But my parents were barely scraping by and still had me in hockey for years. The cost issue, while real, gets overstated a bit. Most hockey players come from blue collar, working-class families. Quite a few all-time greats come from dirt poor backgrounds. Don't think Walter Gretzky ever made more than 20k per year.
And without getting too political, many hispanics do quite well for themselves in the US. Certainly well enough to enroll a kid (or two) in minor hockey. It's more of a cultural issue, and that's where the NHL comes in to play. There's no reason hockey can't be huge among that group. The NBA has them now, but if the NHL could attract some legit hispanic talent that could change pretty quickly.
admittedly the increases weren't as high as the NHL's, but 10-11 was the NBA's best seasons ratings wise since 2002, and the lockout shortened season still improved on those numbers.
this year? back to where they were. If anything, they've declined from 10-11, and are certainly lower than 11-12.
edit: i guess tinyrl isnt allowed
wingsfan please. All these excuses for the NHL? Just admit the NBA is more popular.
