I'm a pragmatic skeptic about the future of hockey and who it appeals to. The argument for Houston IMO is market size. But demographically, Salt Lake is as good of a "small market" you could probably get the NHL to work well in where there isn't already a team.
I think it'll be a fine hockey market and I like the natural mountain rivalry with Colorado.
I also kind of like Austin more than Houston. As long as you don't compete on Saturdays with Longhorns football that's a market with the demographics for hockey as well IMO, and there are no other pro sports there. Basically the Columbus model, but ideally with competent ownership (Poor ownership has been the barrier in Columbus)
Houston, like any current NBA city, would come down to the NBA owner as they would more than likely hold the arena management agreement or own the arena, ala Portland. Rockets owner would buy an NHL team but only at his price. If he doesn't get one, it won't bother him. He's not some big hockey fan or anything, just looking to add to his portfolio only.
That's the problem when you are second to a market with an NBA team. Either the NBA owner buys the NHL team or you get locked out of the market, unless you can build another arena in a different county, like what they are doing in ATL.
