An AP article on Southern California and hockey

[Fugu]

It's about developing "brand loyalties" among 22 year old men.

Why? Young men will make major purchases in the next 10 years. Even if married, the a male has a disproportionate influence on the brand of car, brand of TV, brand of computer, etc purchased.

If you're selling laundry detergent you don't advertise on NHL games. If you're selling washing machines--you don't it on NHL. if you're selling trucks, cars, beer, luxury cars (BMW, Volvo, Hummer) you advertise on NHL games.

Are you married, Falconer?

You do realize the woman of the house ALWAYS has the nicest car in the family? Right?

The TV? I'll agree to that one. He just took the clone with him one day and they concocted some story about 'not being able to see the puck'... but as any lifelong fan knows (and we're lifelong fans in my house), that's not needed.

The rest of your post, I find to be surprisingly gender-ist.

To add to your point...ask that 34 year old housewife to name one current member of any Southern California sports team. My guess is that she:
1) be unable to come up with a name
2) name someone who is retired now
3) name someone who is now on a different team

Women are less likely to be sports fans. Women with children at home have even less free time for sports. So the paper talks to a person who is the most causal of sports fans--and surprise surprise--this busy suburban mom doesn't know anything bout the Ducks. Wow, color me not surprised.

Unbelievable. So the 30 something male can name something about NHL teams-- even though, you know, no one watches because that's what they tell us in these here threads every day.

This defies the logic then of a league that claims the highest proportion of female fans of any major sport. Fourty per cent is not an insignificant figure, yet you're blithely dismissive of actual demographic data.

 

[poppap527]

Look at the number of youth and Adult ice hockey leagues (El Segundo, Valencia, Culver, Norwalk, Pickwick, and several in Orange County)

Palos Verdes and Lakewood also have good sized adult leagues. It is funny tho, many of the players you see there are also at another league. I play at El Segundo, Lakewood and Palos verdes, and most players in in the PV and Lakewood league i also see at El Segundo.

The Toyota Sports Center in El Segundo is the big one.

 

[ChompChomp]

Let's not forget that the LA metro area is the #2 US media market in the country and has no NFL team. The NFL ran away from LA. That means LA is a very strange sports market to begin with.

And please don't refer to people of SoCal as "all Californians." The SF Bay Area, #4 US media market, is a whole different animal and the Sharks are making progress there although as opposed to LA, there are two NFL teams here.

In the Bay Area like SoCal many fans are of the bandwagon variety, but the Sharks winning a cup will get more buzz in all forms in the Bay Area than the Ducks Cup in 06-07 did in SoCal.

 

[Enstrom39]

Are you married, Falconer?

You do realize the woman of the house ALWAYS has the nicest car in the family? Right?

The TV? I'll agree to that one. He just took the clone with him one day and they concocted some story about 'not being able to see the puck'... but as any lifelong fan knows (and we're lifelong fans in my house), that's not needed.

I'm married for over ten years and I always handle car and television purchases. I'm quite certain I could go find marketing data to support my claim that men are much more likely to be the decision makers on these sorts of products.

The rest of your post, I find to be surprisingly gender-ist.

Unbelievable. So the 30 something male can name something about NHL teams-- even though, you know, no one watches because that's what they tell us in these here threads every day.

This defies the logic then of a league that claims the highest proportion of female fans of any major sport. Fourty per cent is not an insignificant figure, yet you're blithely dismissive of actual demographic data.

My wife is probably one of the most hockey knowledgeable women out there. I ask her questions about prospects because she knows that area better than I do. My wife plays hockey and two of my best friends are a pair of women who I've played with for years. I have no problem with women in hockey, I have 5 of them on my Adult League Co-ed team.

To be non-"gender-ist" do I have to believe that men and women have an identical level of interest in sports? Because that's patently untrue.

a) Women are less interested in sports than men on average.
b) Women compose a higher percentage of NHL fans than fans of other sports.
These two facts are not mutually exclusive.

My sister is married and has three kids. My sister used to play hockey and she like the NHL, but she has no idea who plays for the Avalanche (she lives in Denver) my brother-in-law on the other hand knows all about the Aves, Broncos, Nuggets and Rockies. If you're going to take the temperature of a sports market talking to a harried suburban mother is a poor way to do it.

 

[Fugu]

I'm married for over ten years and I always handle car and television purchases. I'm quite certain I could go find marketing data to support my claim that men are much more likely to be the decision makers on these sorts of products.

I'll take you up on this challenge. You might be surprised about who influences decisions on many products. Automobiles especially may fall into this category. Now, what also muddies the water a bit is that people are putting of marriage longer and longer. Thus you'll probably find that 20 something women have to make those decisions for themselves. (Since we're discussing the 18-35 yo demographic.)

At the same time, while we're having this debate about product purchase decision making, there's nothing written in stone that says auto, beer and computer companies are the only ones interested in advertising in sports programming, for example. If NHL fans are higher income, educated, techy, and 40% of them are female... why wouldn't techy product producers target this group? It makes more sense than trying to sell lite beer to a group that probably prefers micro breweries.

My wife is probably one of the most hockey knowledgeable women out there. I ask her questions about prospects because she knows that area better than I do. My wife plays hockey and two of my best friends are a pair of women who I've played with for years. I have no problem with women in hockey, I have 5 of them on my Adult League Co-ed team.

To be non-"gender-ist" do I have to believe that men and women have an identical level of interest in sports? Because that's patently untrue.

a) Women are less interested in sports than men on average.
b) Women compose a higher percentage of NHL fans than fans of other sports.
These two facts are not mutually exclusive.

My sister is married and has three kids. My sister used to play hockey and she like the NHL, but she has no idea who plays for the Avalanche (she lives in Denver) my brother-in-law on the other hand knows all about the Aves, Broncos, Nuggets and Rockies. If you're going to take the temperature of a sports market talking to a harried suburban mother is a poor way to do it.

See, that's where I think you're missing an opportunity. There is something about hockey that appeals to more women - on average - even if we accept that women are less interested in sports, on average. It's a segment that is significant in just how big it is for the NHL, and could be a harbinger of where they perhaps should direct more effort-- not just try to mimic traditional patterns.

 

[Enstrom39]

I'll take you up on this challenge. You might be surprised about who influences decisions on many products. Automobiles especially may fall into this category. Now, what also muddies the water a bit is that people are putting of marriage longer and longer. Thus you'll probably find that 20 something women have to make those decisions for themselves. (Since we're discussing the 18-35 yo demographic.)

At the same time, while we're having this debate about product purchase decision making, there's nothing written in stone that says auto, beer and computer companies are the only ones interested in advertising in sports programming, for example. If NHL fans are higher income, educated, techy, and 40% of them are female... why wouldn't techy product producers target this group? It makes more sense than trying to sell lite beer to a group that probably prefers micro breweries.



See, that's where I think you're missing an opportunity. There is something about hockey that appeals to more women - on average - even if we accept that women are less interested in sports, on average. It's a segment that is significant in just how big it is for the NHL, and could be a harbinger of where they perhaps should direct more effort-- not just try to mimic traditional patterns.

I agree that people ought to advertise more than cars and beer on NHL games.

If you're got some data on car buying decisions I'd be interested to see that.

re: "women as missed opportunity" I'm not sure exactly what you mean by this. If the NHL is getting 40% of their fans from women it sounds to me that they are in fact doing BETTER than other leagues and ergo not missing out. But perhaps, you meant something different.

 

[Fugu]

I agree that people ought to advertise more than cars and beer on NHL games.

If you're got some data on car buying decisions I'd be interested to see that.

re: "women as missed opportunity" I'm not sure exactly what you mean by this. If the NHL is getting 40% of their fans from women it sounds to me that they are in fact doing BETTER than other leagues and ergo not missing out. But perhaps, you meant something different.

A couple of quick finds...

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/feb2005/nf20050214_9413_db_082.htm

http://www.microsoft.com/smallbusin...icans.aspx#WomenpowerhowtomarkettoofAmericans

 

[Enstrom39]

A couple of quick finds...

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/feb2005/nf20050214_9413_db_082.htm

http://www.microsoft.com/smallbusin...icans.aspx#WomenpowerhowtomarkettoofAmericans

I read both and found nothing that referenced the distribution of purchasing decisions (or purchasers by gender) in the auto or TV sectors. The closest thing I found to the autos was this:

"Sales to women grew to 10%, or 23,000, of all bikes sold in 2003 vs. just 2% in 1985."

Here's something that confirms my personal observations:
http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2006/06/01/009311.html

"MCLEAN, Va.--June 1, 2006--As the summer car-buying season kicks-off, Capital One Auto Finance's second Gender Rules of the Road survey of automotive buying habits shows that a significant percentage of women continue to feel disadvantaged in the car-buying process. The national survey of 1,000 female car buyers finds that an astonishing 77 percent of women plan to bring a man along for their next vehicle purchase - a slight increase from the 75 percent who indicated the same in Capital One's 2004 survey."

 

[Dolemite]

Let's not forget that the LA metro area is the #2 US media market in the country and has no NFL team. The NFL ran away from LA. That means LA is a very strange sports market to begin with.

No, southern California sports attendance is simple. People like winning teams. You don't win, they won't come and watch. They are the biggest bandwagon sports market in the US, if not the world.

Example...

When USC was in it's 'death penalty' (for recruiting violations and other times they got their hands caught in the proverbial cookie jar)/uber suckage phase during the 80's they couldn't draw squat.

Look at them now. A winning program for many years and they pack the stands....and the Coliseum is ****ing HUGE.

And please don't refer to people of SoCal as "all Californians." The SF Bay Area, #4 US media market, is a whole different animal and the Sharks are making progress there although as opposed to LA, there are two NFL teams here.

Yeah, northern Californians are a little sensitive when you lump them together with southern Californians. There's a little joke for California Residents that the state of California is actually divided into two sub states...the State of Northern California and the State of Southern California.

 

[ChompChomp]

I wonder though if it was a big mistake for the NHL to have two teams in this market. Seems like the only reason the Ducks came into existence was because Disney saw an opportunity to use an NHL team to market itself, and use itself and its now long dead Mighty Ducks movie "Franchise" to market the team. That's would explain why Disney got out of its ownership of the Ducks in about a decade's time.

 

[Randall Graves*]

Let's not forget that the LA metro area is the #2 US media market in the country and has no NFL team. The NFL ran away from LA. That means LA is a very strange sports market to begin with.

And please don't refer to people of SoCal as "all Californians." The SF Bay Area, #4 US media market, is a whole different animal and the Sharks are making progress there although as opposed to LA, there are two NFL teams here.

In the Bay Area like SoCal many fans are of the bandwagon variety, but the Sharks winning a cup will get more buzz in all forms in the Bay Area than the Ducks Cup in 06-07 did in SoCal.

Well maybe you should finally win a real cup instead of all the paper titles your team owns, then we can find out

 

[Dolemite]

I wonder though if it was a big mistake for the NHL to have two teams in this market. Seems like the only reason the Ducks came into existence was because Disney saw an opportunity to use an NHL team to market itself, and use itself and its now long dead Mighty Ducks movie "Franchise" to market the team. That's would explain why Disney got out of its ownership of the Ducks in about a decade's time.

No it's not. The Ducks have many options they have yet to explore if they want to boost their fan base and interest in the game.

Two of them would be marketing San Diego and Mexico. The Padres have invested heavily into marketing the team in the Tijuana area. They have gone as far as opening a Padres team store in the Tijuana area.

The San Diego area has a HUGE hockey base, mostly military who grew up watching hockey in traditional hockey markets.

The Kings problems are in the front office.

 

[arinkrat*]

I wonder though if it was a big mistake for the NHL to have two teams in this market. Seems like the only reason the Ducks came into existence was because Disney saw an opportunity to use an NHL team to market itself, and use itself and its now long dead Mighty Ducks movie "Franchise" to market the team. That's would explain why Disney got out of its ownership of the Ducks in about a decade's time.

Anaheim didn't just get a franchise because of Disney. When the City of Anaheim built the Arrowhead Pond, they were looking for a permanent tenant. Norm Green was leaving Minnesota and was about to sell the team to interests in Anaheim. But then Bruce McNall convinced his close friend Michael Eisner that Disney should lobby the NHL to award a new franchise to Anaheim, and they worked out a deal with the NHL so that Norm Green could sell the team to Skip Hicks and Anaheim would get an expansion team. So Anaheim almost got the Stars, but got the Mighty Ducks instead.

Disney, I have been told, has a business philosophy that each business segment must stand on its own. The problem is that they created a management organization for their sports teams that was run under their "parks" (i.e., shared the same president as Disneyland/California adventure) and the sports teams shared their marketing and promotions departments when they needed departments dedicated to each sports team. You're right that Disney bled their sports/movies tie ins. The Mighty Ducks didn't start improving until the management areas for the Angels and the Mighty Ducks were split up and when the Mighty Ducks were given more autonomy to run their operations like a hockey organization (when they hired Bryan Murray as coach first and then promoted him to GM the next year). Until Disney did this, they were more concerned with making money off of merchandising than owning a sports franchise and that handicapped the Mighty Ducks' hockey operations.

The mistake the NHL made was giving Disney the franchise, not that they decided to put a team in Anaheim. Disney did a good job merchandising (they had great sales of Mighty Ducks merchandise in the first several years of the franchise) and actually had very good attendance for the first five or six years of the Mighty Ducks existence, but they did a horrible job in terms of sports management. Sports teams cannot be run like movie studios or theme parks, and corporations only concerned with the bottom line should not own sports teams, particularly NHL teams that don't have the revenue streams that the NFL, NBA and MLB have.

The Samuelis on the other hand have a vested interest in keeping the Ducks hockey fan base growing because they also own the management contract for the Honda Center, and when the Clippers renewed their lease at Staples Center, they knew they had to keep the Ducks in Anaheim. The Ducks are much more visible in the community and have increased their community outreach and are really getting behind youth hockey (both roller and ice) in southern California as well. The current economic situation and the Ducks inconsistency will probably hurt the Ducks in terms of sustaining growth in the near term, but they have shown they can tap into the market and can grow their fan base.

 

[Randall Graves*]

No it's not. The Ducks have many options they have yet to explore if they want to boost their fan base and interest in the game.

Two of them would be marketing San Diego and Mexico. The Padres have invested heavily into marketing the team in the Tijuana area. They have gone as far as opening a Padres team store in the Tijuana area.

The San Diego area has a HUGE hockey base, mostly military who grew up watching hockey in traditional hockey markets.

The Kings problems are in the front office.

Aren't the ducks blacked out in SD though?

 

[Dolemite]

Aren't the ducks blacked out in SD though?

TV? Nope. When I lived there you could see both Ducks and Kings games without blackout restrictions. Granted you had to have cable but if the games were televised, you could see them.

The first year I moved to San Diego they were a Ducks Radio network affiliate (The Mighty 1090). Then either the station changed it's name or the station was bought out by another company and they got rid of the Ducks games.

 

[jsginsocal]

For what its worth I am married and make all the decisions about cars/televisions/computers etc...

On another note - yes the Ducks have changed stations...830am...I think...

 

[Rob]

I agree with you.

But welcome to a sport that has a majority of its followers not believing in spreading the game. Probably the only sport in the world that can say that.....

The NHL does not represent all of hockey.

I will support hockey anywhere. That doesn't mean that the NHL should expand into Mexico City.

 

[Rob]

The funny thing is that if hockey really became as popular in the USA as it is in Canada, then we would see a flood of USA born in the NHL.

Next the Canadian Press would switch to writing about "Is Canada losing control of 'our game' to the Americans" like they wrote after the Russian won several international tournaments in the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s.

If the Canada Press can't whine about how unpopular hockey is in the USA, they will whine about how other "foreigners" are taking over "their game" so it's pretty much a no win situation for anyone south of the border.

Who in Canada was whining about Chicago or Boston when they were having their troubles?

 

[Mayor Bee]

[deleted]