Yet another argument for the NHL to move at least one team to Canuckistan

Now, now, don't go introducing logic into the equation. This isn't about logic, it's about a bunch of hockey snobs convinced that the world will end if a team ever dares set up shop below the Ohio River. That's why you routinely get people saying to fold franchises like Anaheim and Tampa Bay, which are going great guns at the box office, and hardly a peep about the Isles, Bruins, 'Hawks, etc.

 

Why the fuck should Jersey lose its team?

 

Worst NHL teams per attendance 2008:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/attendance

30. N.Y. Islanders -- 13,640
29. Phoenix -- 14,820
28. Columbus -- 14,823
27. Nashville -- 14,910
26. Boston -- 15,384 (Original Six)
25. Florida -- 15,436
24. Washington -- 15,472
23. New Jersey -- 15,564 (new arena)

 

Let's stick with the original premise: dollars generated, not attendance figures which are, um, wonky at best.

Devils may be 23rd in attendance but they're 15th in dollars generated. Their ticket revenue is up a whopping 41.6% over '06/07

Look at the PDF I posted.

The top ten teams in ticket revenue are the six Canadian teams plus traditional hockey markets: Rangers, Wild, Detroit and Colorado. Makes sense.

The next ten are the usual suspects: a combination of good teams (Sharks, Ducks) and good solid hockey markets who don't have the economic clout of the top ten. Tampa's still running on their Stanley Cup fumes.

The bottom third are exactly what you'd expect--not very good hockey markets (Los Angeles, Nashville, Atlanta, Florida) where ticket prices are a helluva lower than you'd find in the top 10 PLUS some pretty sad sack teams: Islanders, Chicago and St. Louis. In the case of the Hawks, I bet you find them in the top half in ticket revenue next year.

 

In all likelyhood because they jacked up the price as they moved into the new building, as most teams do entering new digs.

I think that makes money generated over bums in seats a little bit of a false premise.

 

GB,

The old barn was a dump so a price hike was justified. I suspect the Devils will maintain their postion in revenue next year unless they lower their ticket prices --which I doubt.

Anyway, the exercise is in dollar revenue, not bums in the seats. NJ has been a tough sell most of the time but they've won a couple of Cups and they have one of the best organizations in the leauge.

I"m sure it's easy to find but it'd be interesting to see a chart showing average ticket prices across the league.

 

The lack of box office appeal for the Sun Belt teams is especially disappointing because that is where the people are moving too. Phoenix is a tough market because you're the sixth biggest thing in the market behind the Suns, the D-Backs (though the franchise is somewhat loathed), Arizona hoops, Cardinals football, and Arizona State football.
Bettman was hoping the snowbirds would come out and the increased US "fanbase" would help the league get a national TV contract. It worked. For a while. Hockey is a great sport, the playoffs are the best, but it needs to realize "it is what it is" and go where the hockey fans are.

 

I understand your reasoning here, but I think the same revenue numbers could have been achieved by the Devils if ticket prices had been a few ticks lower, therby pricing more people into going, seeing the new digs and getting more repeat customers who are impressed with the team and arena.

I think it's more important for a team to maximize the demand for tickets, get a great atmosphere in the building. Once that's established, they can then adjust to see how high they can go without demand falling off the cliff.

 

Folks, we're forgetting the 800-pound gorilla in the room: TV revenue and Nielsen ratings. The U.S. market is where the TV cash is, and Canadian markets do not count in the Nielsens.

 

No, the US market is where the cash isn't. The NHL has a "revenue sharing" agreement with the NHL, meaning, no revenue, no sharing. It's a pittance.

CBC contributes more money to the NHL than any other rights holderr. Between that and the amount TSN and the regional Sportsnet channels contribute is precisely another reason for another team in Canada.

Edit: That's why there are potentially three Saturday night games in the Final. Because CBC for the first time flexed its muscle. If NBC had its way, we'd be watching the games on Saturday or Sunday afternoons.

 

Winnipeg proper has nearly 700,000 people. That's too small?

In my perfect world, Winnipeg, Québec City and Seattle all get teams before Kansas City gets one.

 

It's clear that given the lack of support over the years despite the valiant efforts of ownership, that Chicago has lost any right to have an NHL franchise. They should be moved immediately to North Dakota and play in the Ralph.