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.
Washington Post: Owners shouldn’t underestimate the Fehr factor
Baseball is a good social sport. The moments "something might happen" are rather predictable. If you want to sit down and be solely entertained by something, it's not a good choice.
In some ways, it's much more fun to go to a baseball game with a bunch of friends than it is a hockey game. With hockey, you've got to be paying attention at times when play is ongoing.
Works for me though. I don't mind attending games by myself and I work near the stadium so I can sometimes get half priced tickets from scalpers 10 minutes after puck drop.
The thing that strikes me as silly is if they can agree on the linked revenue percentages, not having the season (and consequently burning fan goodwill along the way) is probably a bigger loss than having the season.
You think the average fan in the South is going to come running back after a completely canceled season? I don't.
So you should have in support of reaching a deal soon: Van, Tor, Mtl, Det, Clb, Nas, Phi, Pit, NYR, Chi, LA, SJ, FLA, TB, Car, STL at least. That's 16 teams, many of which lose a lot of money by not playing, and some of which might suffer big fanbase losses if they lose the season.
Last edited by Guru Meditation: 11-25-2012 at 01:38 PM.
the sports they play is AMERICA's PAST TIME!! and not some niche sports like hockey..
I'm just saying that because of all the cries that MLB is dead/dying and was irreparably damaged by one man in 1994. Were those rumors greatly exaggerated?
I'm just saying that because of all the cries that MLB is dead/dying and was irreparably damaged by one man in 1994. Were those rumors greatly exaggerated?
It's unknown if Cal Ripkin and the Steroid fueled home run race never happened if Baseball would've bounced back so quickly. I think since it's so ingrained in the American culture is was insatiable, but the '94 strike definitely drove a lot of die hards away who either never came back or came back many years later.
The LA Dodgers apparently are really close to a 25 year, 7 billion dollar tv deal. So basically the Dodgers local TV deal is worth more per year than the NHL's national TV deal in the US.
The MLB was typically getting 40 million viewers on average during World Series games in the early 80s.
Most recently I believe they averaged less than 15 million. That's with a population increase of over 100 million.
Adding on to that, baseball's audience skews terribly to the 50+ demo.
Not a system to follow, at all. They've been three steps behind for years now, from lacking a salary cap to being foolish enough to not implement instant replay, to not exploring ways to speed the game up.
NHL median age is 44, NFL 45 and MLB 50 if I remember correctly. All sports leagues are skewing poorly.
There's no doubt baseball is becoming more regional but it's a different business model than it was in the 1980's. I remember watching baseball in the 1980's, it was hard to get baseball games all through the year, you basically had to rely on the national TV games, so the World Series was a huge deal regardless of who was in it. Now, I can watch every game my team plays quite easily, and the goes for any fan of any team. If you're in market they're all available and out of market MLB.TV is a huge money maker and IMO an elite product. I'm a huge fan but I don't really care about national games anymore. I watch the Braves games on my PS3 or computer through MLB.tv.
Baseball has probably done better with their online property than any other sport, which helps with younger demographics.
People are saying baseball has failed to grasp what was happening, I actually disagree. I'd say they realized where they were headed on a national level and took steps to become more relevant regionally and have a bigger footprint on the internet, where they were far ahead of any of the other major sports here.
Right now attendance is good, regional TV money is great, online money is great and even the national TV money is strong.
The thing that strikes me as silly is if they can agree on the linked revenue percentages, not having the season (and consequently burning fan goodwill along the way) is probably a bigger loss than having the season.
You think the average fan in the South is going to come running back after a completely canceled season? I don't.
So you should have in support of reaching a deal soon: Van, Tor, Mtl, Det, Clb, Nas, Phi, Pit, NYR, Chi, LA, SJ, FLA, TB, Car, STL at least. That's 16 teams, many of which lose a lot of money by not playing, and some of which might suffer big fanbase losses if they lose the season.
How exactly do these teams lose alot of money by not playing?
