HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

NBC/VS WIN new NHL TV Deal: $200MM/yr x 10 yrs, Exclusive Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-19-2011, 02:47 PM
  #126
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Posts: 29,973
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danishh View Post
anyone have a rough estimate of what league central revenues were prior to this deal? Mainly how much there was outside of the tv portion? Trying to get a better idea of the true impact of this deal per team.

edit: fugu called it ~340M for tv, so i'll call it $350 total with 25M then going to rev sharing.

that means around 100M/30 teams in new money, and 25M in reduced revenue sharing to the top 10 revenue teams, distributed proportionately b/w them by their revenue.

so, for the teams we're generally concerned about financially, and the middle tier of break even/small profit/small loss, this means about 3.3M extra revenue a year.

based on last year's forbes numbers (standard forbes disclaimer), that would make ottawa, pittsburgh and minnesota profitable, and put NYI, nashville, st. louis, anaheim, and san jose into the 'lose a little' category. Columbus, Carolina, Buffalo, Tampa, Atlanta, Washington (disclaimer), Florida, and Phoenix would still lose money, albeit less. Some of those teams are cap floor teams though, so the amount of money they'll have to spend may negate some of the benefit.

The last real figure we have is from NYR's Dolan's suit where he claims central revenues were only 10% of the total HRR.

What makes it difficult to tease out the other figures is the CAD's effect so roughly 1/3rd of HRR; and then some growth in the sponsorship and merchandising arm (NHL Enterprises), given the success of the Winter Classic and such. I think it's probably safe to just start with 10-12% being central revenues and adding in this new amount.

So $2.9 billion x 12% = $348 MM central HRR

Adding in the TV money ($120MM), or $3.02 billion, and 15.5% central HRR ($468). Close enough. I don't think it's 20% central HRR to start, but it 'could be a bit higher than 12% but no lower than 10%.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2011, 02:50 PM
  #127
Ignoramus*
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 725
vCash: 500
No exaggeration; this is THE biggest news in the history of the National Hockey League.

Amazing win for the NHL, for Bettman, and for the fans. Un-f'ing-believable. Monster stability, monster partnership, monster money, monster exposure.


Ignoramus* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2011, 02:55 PM
  #128
Reality Check
Registered User
 
Reality Check's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 11,406
vCash: 500
Deal is fine if the NHL is content with being a fringe 4th sport in the states.

Reality Check is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2011, 02:56 PM
  #129
sctvman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Charleston, SC
Country: United States
Posts: 335
vCash: 500
Great move for the NHL. Not only would they be behind everything else on ESPN that was mentioned earlier, but Bracketbuster basketball on Saturdays and several other sports.

On the new channel, they're the focus.

sctvman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2011, 02:57 PM
  #130
MayDay
Registered User
 
MayDay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Mount Kisco, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,902
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lynn Belvedere View Post
No exaggeration; this is THE biggest news in the history of the National Hockey League.

Amazing win for the NHL, for Bettman, and for the fans. Un-f'ing-believable. Monster stability, monster partnership, monster money, monster exposure.

It's a good deal for the NHL, but let's not get carried away.

This is not even twice the amount that ESPN was paying the NHL more than a decade ago. And it's still far, far below what the other major pro leagues are paid for their TV rights.

MayDay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2011, 02:57 PM
  #131
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 57,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moo View Post
What I am anxious to see is how this all pans out in the playoffs, what networks these games air on, and what happens if there is OT.
Well with 2-3 games simultaneously possible in the first round, I could see something like:

Thursday night:
7pm ET: Versus
7pm ET: CNBC (this channel has shown Olympic hockey)
7:30pm ET: USA
10:30pm ET: Versus (or MSNBC if earlier game goes into OT.)

(What do you want to bet that Versus is rebranded NBCS - NBC Sports. )

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2011, 03:01 PM
  #132
Maxpac
Registered User
 
Maxpac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: hockey city
Posts: 14,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lynn Belvedere View Post
No exaggeration; this is THE biggest news in the history of the National Hockey League.

Amazing win for the NHL, for Bettman, and for the fans. Un-f'ing-believable. Monster stability, monster partnership, monster money, monster exposure.

Somebody will have to explain to me why the deal is so good...

Maxpac is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2011, 03:04 PM
  #133
Marc the Habs Fan
Moderator
Cakes!
 
Marc the Habs Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Longueuil
Country: Canada
Posts: 55,891
vCash: 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lynn Belvedere View Post
No exaggeration; this is THE biggest news in the history of the National Hockey League.

Amazing win for the NHL, for Bettman, and for the fans. Un-f'ing-believable. Monster stability, monster partnership, monster money, monster exposure.

Hi Pierre McGuire, welcome to HF!

Marc the Habs Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2011, 03:05 PM
  #134
Ogopogo*
 
Ogopogo*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,214
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxpac View Post
Somebody will have to explain to me why the deal is so good...
'Cuz each team gets $6.7 million/year. Now the Coyotes and Thrashers will be saved!!!!!

Ogopogo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2011, 03:05 PM
  #135
MayDay
Registered User
 
MayDay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Mount Kisco, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,902
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
Well with 2-3 games simultaneously possible in the first round, I could see something like:

Thursday night:
7pm ET: Versus
7pm ET: CNBC (this channel has shown Olympic hockey)
7:30pm ET: USA
10:30pm ET: Versus (or MSNBC if earlier game goes into OT.)

(What do you want to bet that Versus is rebranded NBCS - NBC Sports. )
Having overflow games on other NBC-family channels might really bring the sport to different demographics.

I remember reading an article in the NY Times during the Olympics about how all the day-traders and stockbrokers down on Wall Street were really getting into the curling that was being shown every afternoon on CNBC.

The difference between hockey and curling is that hockey is actually on TV outside of the Olympics, so it is in a position to capitalize on any newly generated interest.

MayDay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2011, 03:08 PM
  #136
Jonas1235
Registered User
 
Jonas1235's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,467
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MayDay View Post
It's a good deal for the NHL, but let's not get carried away.

This is not even twice the amount that ESPN was paying the NHL more than a decade ago. And it's still far, far below what the other major pro leagues are paid for their TV rights.
What you don't get is that the Canadian tv deal is up in 3 years also. Which will be in the 250 million annually range. So that's eventually $450 million in national tv money, not including local RSN tv money.

Doesn't include the substanial growth that the NHL Network is going to get when it's getting pushed heavily by Comcast. NBC is even building them a new studio in Stamford, Conn.

Ratings will grow greatly over this deal, which inturn grows advertising money, grows merchandise sales and many other things. The more exposure the NHL gets, the more $$$ that comes in through every aspect of their business. They're already had revenues increase every year since the lockout.

This probably adds another $200-300 million every season.

Revenues could be at 3.5 billion by 2013.

Jonas1235 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2011, 03:14 PM
  #137
MayDay
Registered User
 
MayDay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Mount Kisco, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,902
vCash: 500
The Globe and Mail confirms that Versus will be re-branded as NBC Sports.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...rticle1991065/

Quote:
As well, NBC/Comcast is promising to make over hockey’s image as its prime sports tenant on Versus (soon to be renamed NBC Sports Channel) and a significant force on the main network. Sources tell the Globe & Mail that the broadcaster and the league are looking to create a “March Madness” style promotion of the playoffs on both NBC and its news sports cable channel. They will also extend the reach of the NHL’s Winter Classic, which Ebersol described as “single most successful new sports venture on the American landscape in a decade”.

MayDay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2011, 03:19 PM
  #138
Melrose Munch
Registered User
 
Melrose Munch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Deal is fine if the NHL is content with being a fringe 4th sport in the states.
Usually I agree with you, but this is better than nothing.

Melrose Munch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2011, 03:20 PM
  #139
sctvman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Charleston, SC
Country: United States
Posts: 335
vCash: 500
I'm happy they made the deal, if it's for more exposure, which they really need right now. How is the Nashville/Anaheim and Tampa Bay/Pittsburgh series barely on nationally here, but in Canada, basically on everywhere.

I forgot about CNBC. They could put weekend games that conflict with Versus there, and have preview shows.

sctvman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2011, 03:21 PM
  #140
8BostonRocker24
Registered User
 
8BostonRocker24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Los Gatos via Boston
Country: China
Posts: 9,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by billycanuck View Post
Any word on what Versus will be re-branded as this time?
NBCS? (NBC Sports)

8BostonRocker24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2011, 03:21 PM
  #141
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
I realize it's apparently better than the existing deal, but I thought everyone agreed the existing deal was absolute crap. $200M a year for the US doesn't sound like very much....?

  Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2011, 03:23 PM
  #142
HackandLube
Registered User
 
HackandLube's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,491
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MayDay View Post
Having overflow games on other NBC-family channels might really bring the sport to different demographics.

I remember reading an article in the NY Times during the Olympics about how all the day-traders and stockbrokers down on Wall Street were really getting into the curling that was being shown every afternoon on CNBC.

The difference between hockey and curling is that hockey is actually on TV outside of the Olympics, so it is in a position to capitalize on any newly generated interest.
IIRC, according to the article, the reason they watched curling during the Olympics was because it was a sport you didn't have to pay attention to and it complimented their jobs well being in the background.

HackandLube is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2011, 03:23 PM
  #143
Preds Partisan
Nothing
 
Preds Partisan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
Well with 2-3 games simultaneously possible in the first round, I could see something like:

Thursday night:
7pm ET: Versus
7pm ET: CNBC (this channel has shown Olympic hockey)
7:30pm ET: USA
10:30pm ET: Versus (or MSNBC if earlier game goes into OT.)

(What do you want to bet that Versus is rebranded NBCS - NBC Sports. )
I know you're just throwing out a "what if", but is there a reason that the NHL Network can't televise a game instead of a CNBC (or whatever) in those instances were scheduling will have simultaneous games? Secondarily, when there is the inevitable carryover because of OT is there any reason the NHL Network can't show the game in progress until the originally scheduled channel clears the current game?

I love that playoff games will be televised nationally, but with the scheduling difficulties of each arena there seems like there could be major issues trying to squeeze in the first round games into the TV broadcast grid on a national basis.

Preds Partisan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2011, 03:23 PM
  #144
Moo
Moooooooooooooooo!
 
Moo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Valrico, FL
Posts: 29,026
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
Well with 2-3 games simultaneously possible in the first round, I could see something like:

Thursday night:
7pm ET: Versus
7pm ET: CNBC (this channel has shown Olympic hockey)
7:30pm ET: USA
10:30pm ET: Versus (or MSNBC if earlier game goes into OT.)

(What do you want to bet that Versus is rebranded NBCS - NBC Sports. )
I could go with that. As long as there is an overflow channel for the starts of games, I am cool with that. TNT has been known to show the start of MLB playoff games when an earlier game runs long on TBS. A similar system could work here.

Moo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2011, 03:25 PM
  #145
MayDay
Registered User
 
MayDay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Mount Kisco, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,902
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
$200M a year for the US doesn't sound like very much....?
Not much compared to what?

To put the amount in perspective, the most lucrative television deal the NHL has ever had in the United States was worth $120 million per year.

MayDay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2011, 03:26 PM
  #146
HamiltonFan
bettman's a Weasel
 
HamiltonFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 303
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MayDay View Post
It's a good deal for the NHL, but let's not get carried away.

This is not even twice the amount that ESPN was paying the NHL more than a decade ago. And it's still far, far below what the other major pro leagues are paid for their TV rights.
Exactly. This is a garbage deal when you look at the big picture, namely the 900 million per year the NBA gets. So this is the cumulation, the crowning jewel, of the last couple of decades of 'growing the game'?? When compared to that ESPN deal over a decade ago, this new contract has basically just kept up with inflation, there hasn't been much appreciable growth. The mythical TV contract clearly has not happened. Does this mean we're locked into another decade of the status quo, in which massive subsidies will continue to flow southward in order to maintain the precious national TV footprint? AWESOME!!! What a league!!!!

HamiltonFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2011, 03:26 PM
  #147
the overrated
wicked overrated
 
the overrated's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Suburbia
Country: United States
Posts: 4,210
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Deal is fine if the NHL is content with being a fringe 4th sport in the states.
Is it safe to presume that you feel that hockey would be bumped into a top 3 or 4 status if they'd signed with ESPN/Disney or Turner?

Out of curiosity, which sport would it pass?

the overrated is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2011, 03:27 PM
  #148
Dolemite
The one...the only..
 
Dolemite's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Country: Netherlands
Posts: 38,300
vCash: 500
NHL/NBC Press conference Audio/Transcription (for you peeps on mobile phones)

http://thenhlhotlist.azvibe.com/2011...iotranscribed/

Dolemite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2011, 03:29 PM
  #149
danishh
Dat Stache
 
danishh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: mtl/ott/somewhere
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,710
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
The last real figure we have is from NYR's Dolan's suit where he claims central revenues were only 10% of the total HRR.

What makes it difficult to tease out the other figures is the CAD's effect so roughly 1/3rd of HRR; and then some growth in the sponsorship and merchandising arm (NHL Enterprises), given the success of the Winter Classic and such. I think it's probably safe to just start with 10-12% being central revenues and adding in this new amount.

So $2.9 billion x 12% = $348 MM central HRR

Adding in the TV money ($120MM), or $3.02 billion, and 15.5% central HRR ($468). Close enough. I don't think it's 20% central HRR to start, but it 'could be a bit higher than 12% but no lower than 10%.
meaning this is all over the threshold then.

i dont know much about rev sharing. From what i can tell, minimum resdistribution is 4.5% HRR, so 136M. That means ~34 M can be taken from the hrr to fund rev sharing. So of this new money, 86M goes to 30 teams and the remaining 34M goes to the top 10 revenue teams (in the form of reduced contributions to rev sharing).


Last edited by danishh: 04-19-2011 at 03:38 PM.
danishh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2011, 03:29 PM
  #150
jessebelanger
Registered User
 
jessebelanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,348
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HamiltonFan View Post
Exactly. This is a garbage deal when you look at the big picture, namely the 900 million per year the NBA gets. So this is the cumulation, the crowning jewel, of the last couple of decades of 'growing the game'?? When compared to that ESPN deal over a decade ago, this new contract has basically just kept up with inflation, there hasn't been much appreciable growth. The mythical TV contract clearly has not happened. Does this mean we're locked into another decade of the status quo, in which massive subsidies will continue to flow southward in order to maintain the precious national TV footprint? AWESOME!!! What a league!!!!
Here we go again. I can't understand your outrage here - the $$'s don't affect you, the coverage doesn't affect you (assuming you're Canadian). This is an American TV deal that will affect American hockey fans, NBC, and the owners wallets. What, exactly, about this is so upsetting to you? What is your role in this?


If you were an owner - perhaps you would be upset about lack of revenue stream.
If you were a fan in America - perhaps you would be upset that the games are not on ESPN.
If you were an NBC exec - perhaps you would be upset about investing a lot in a sport thats largely a regional niche.

But to be a fan living in Hamilton, Ontario, and be so outraged by this news article - I can't understand it. You're not a stakeholder here - this doesn't affect you in any way.


Last edited by jessebelanger: 04-19-2011 at 03:35 PM.
jessebelanger is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:11 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.