How Viable is a European NHL Outdoor Game?

[singlesliceofcheese]

Do you think it's viable? Why or why not?

If you posit that it is, then what location do you find to be prime? (Country, venue, etc.)

Click to read more...

 

[tarheelhockey]

It’s viable in the sense that it would make money.

Not sure why the NHL would do it, though.

 

[Albatros]

I don't think there's much point, maybe it would sell enough tickets the first time around if the location is chosen well, but as a product it would inevitably be underwhelming.

 

[singlesliceofcheese]

I don't think there's much point, maybe it would sell enough tickets the first time around if the location is chosen well, but as a product it would inevitably be underwhelming.

Why would it be underwhelming?

 

[Albatros]

Why would it be underwhelming?

Terrible atmosphere and no connection whatsoever between the venue and the event.

 

[singlesliceofcheese]

Terrible atmosphere and no connection whatsoever between the venue and the event.

Sounds rather subjective to make a statement of inevitability. Needless to say, that's a recurring feature with NHL outdoor games (putting a hockey game in an unfamiliar venue) and I'd say they've done alright.

 

[Albatros]

No NHL outdoor game has ever left the home markets of the teams involved. Taking the Jets and the Flames to Regina will be the most exotic they've done, and a game in Europe where no one cares about any NHL team is a whole different proposition.

 

[singlesliceofcheese]

No NHL outdoor game has ever left the home markets of the teams involved. Taking the Jets and the Flames to Regina will be the most exotic they've done, and a game in Europe where no one cares about any NHL team is a whole different proposition.

You don't know much, then, since the Winter Classic last year was played in neutral territory.

Where do you get that no one cares? Any evidence? Even if they don't care about the franchises concurrently, that doesn't mean there's no incentive to go if players from the respective countries are marketed accordingly. Nor does it mean that because they may not concurrently care, they wouldn't if an outdoor game were feasible.

 

[Albatros]

The Notre Dame Stadium is located 75 miles away from the United Center. That's in no way comparable to playing in Europe.

Even most hockey fans in Europe don't care about the NHL, and those that do generally do so only casually. The bubble of hardcore NHL fans in Europe who might be ready to travel for an outdoor game is minuscule.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I guess for me the question is why the NHL would try to sell 40,000 tickets with one extremely expensive outdoor game, rather than selling 40,000 tickets with two inexpensive indoor games.

The major reason for outdoor games in NHL markets is the national TV revenue and to drive season ticket sales. Unless we’re talking about a scenario where the NHL is putting a team in Europe, neither of those will really be a factor. The promotional value-added also seems pretty negligible unless you’re expecting to eventually put a team in that market.

The only other rationale I can think of is the novelty factor which might increase ticket value. But is that really a significant consideration here? I doubt it, given the overhead expense of the event.

I dunno, I think it would be successful but I just can’t see the strategic purpose in doing it.

 

[Zenos]

I'm not sure that NHL teams are a big enough draw to be honest.

Don't get me wrong, I was in attendance at the Oilers-Haie game in Cologne in October and it was a great event and a success - but that was in an NHL-sized arena and with the home team present. There was a sizeable contingent of Oilers fans (both supporters who made the trip from Canada, plus many more from around Europe) there, but the vast majority of the crowd were (Cologne) sharks supporters. I reckon demand for the game would have actually been less, had two NHL clubs been involved.

 

[singlesliceofcheese]

The Notre Dame Stadium is located 75 miles away from the United Center. That's in no way comparable to playing in Europe.

Even most hockey fans in Europe don't care about the NHL, and those that do generally do so only casually. The bubble of hardcore NHL fans in Europe who might be ready to travel for an outdoor game is minuscule.

Of course it's not comparable. The issue is that you didn't mention comparability. You mentioned, "No NHL outdoor game has ever left the home markets of the teams involved," whereby I provided an example, since the location isn't strictly Blackhawks territory. Anyhow, I get your point.

How do you know that the number is minuscule? Don't get me wrong, the NHL may not have the same presence in some countries as the local league, but how does this imply that it would be inevitably underwhelming? How are we to know that people wouldn't care if a game were feasible?

 

[singlesliceofcheese]

I guess for me the question is why the NHL would try to sell 40,000 tickets with one extremely expensive outdoor game, rather than selling 40,000 tickets with two inexpensive indoor games.

The major reason for outdoor games in NHL markets is the national TV revenue and to drive season ticket sales. Unless we’re talking about a scenario where the NHL is putting a team in Europe, neither of those will really be a factor. The promotional value-added also seems pretty negligible unless you’re expecting to eventually put a team in that market.

The only other rationale I can think of is the novelty factor which might increase ticket value. But is that really a significant consideration here? I doubt it, given the overhead expense of the event.

I dunno, I think it would be successful but I just can’t see the strategic purpose in doing it.

Yeah, definitely good points. Thanks for the input.

 

[singlesliceofcheese]

I'm not sure that NHL teams are a big enough draw to be honest.

Don't get me wrong, I was in attendance at the Oilers-Haie game in Cologne in October and it was a great event and a success - but that was in an NHL-sized arena and with the home team present. There was a sizeable contingent of Oilers fans (both supporters who made the trip from Canada, plus many more from around Europe) there, but the vast majority of the crowd were (Cologne) sharks supporters. I reckon demand for the game would have actually been less, had two NHL clubs been involved.

I think your concluding sentence may be correct. Though, I think the NHL has noticeably less influence in Germany than some other countries, since they've never had great representation in the league and really don't concurrently. I wonder if a city like Helsinki would fare so well it would justify the venture. Them, or possibly even Gothenburg.

 

[Hivemind]

I guess for me the question is why the NHL would try to sell 40,000 tickets with one extremely expensive outdoor game, rather than selling 40,000 tickets with two inexpensive indoor games.

Why does it have to be only one game? Even for the Winter Classics and Stadium Series games, they often use the rink for multiple events (alumni games, AHL affiliate games, etc). They could very easily schedule multiple NHL games to make place in the outdoor rink they set up, as well as potentially games for the local teams/leagues. If they time it with the start of the end of the pre-season and start of the regular season (which is questionable), they could even have a typical NHL vs European team exhibition game prior to the NHL vs NHL game.

 

[Albatros]

Of course it's not comparable. The issue is that you didn't mention comparability. You mentioned, "No NHL outdoor game has ever left the home markets of the teams involved," whereby I provided an example, since the location isn't strictly Blackhawks territory. Anyhow, I get your point.

One or two hour drive is completely normal for most North American sports fans, even without a special event. Not many of them are going to fly to Europe for any reason, however.

How do you know that the number is minuscule? Don't get me wrong, the NHL may not have the same presence in some countries as the local league, but how does this imply that it would be inevitably underwhelming? How are we to know that people wouldn't care if a game were feasible?

Why would people casually interested in hockey start caring about the NHL just because they play outdoors in the cold instead of a more comfortable arena? First you need the fan base and only then may such special events make sense.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Why does it have to be only one game? Even for the Winter Classics and Stadium Series games, they often use the rink for multiple events (alumni games, AHL affiliate games, etc). They could very easily schedule multiple NHL games to make place in the outdoor rink they set up, as well as potentially games for the local teams/leagues. If they time it with the start of the end of the pre-season and start of the regular season (which is questionable), they could even have a typical NHL vs European team exhibition game prior to the NHL vs NHL game.

I guess I could see it, if someone was already planning to do an outdoor game and invited the NHL to participate. I don't see the NHL paying all the overhead to make it happen, but if someone else was footing the bill and the NHL teams just needed to show up and play the game... sure, why not?

Then the question becomes, what places are likely to be successful in hosting an outdoor exhibition for the local team AND an NHL game back-to-back? That's a lot of tickets at a very high price point. The places that jump to mind are large hockey capitals like Moscow, Stockholm, Helsinki, Prague.

 

[BKIslandersFan]

The Notre Dame Stadium is located 75 miles away from the United Center. That's in no way comparable to playing in Europe.

Even most hockey fans in Europe don't care about the NHL, and those that do generally do so only casually. The bubble of hardcore NHL fans in Europe who might be ready to travel for an outdoor game is minuscule.

Different time zone though.

 

[singlesliceofcheese]

One or two hour drive is completely normal for most North American sports fans, even without a special event. Not many of them are going to fly to Europe for any reason, however.



Why would people casually interested in hockey start caring about the NHL just because they play outdoors in the cold instead of a more comfortable arena? First you need the fan base and only then may such special events make sense.

I think you can cease on the comparability aspect; I think we understand the two are distinct. I was simply emending a statement of your's that's irrespective of this.

Where do you get that there isn't a fan base? Are you speaking for Europe as a whole? Or are you speaking about one country?

 

[BKIslandersFan]

NHL Winter Classic at Old Trafford sounds lit.

 

[Albatros]

I think you can cease on the comparability aspect; I think we understand the two are distinct. I was simply emending a statement of your's that's irrespective of this.

I can't see how 75 miles distance would make it a different market, and if it was a different market the game would never take place in Notre Dame.

Where do you get that there isn't a fan base? Are you speaking for Europe as a whole? Or are you speaking about one country?

There's no market anywhere in Europe for outdoor NHL games. What it would be is a gloomy event in front of 20,000 spectators somewhere in Finland.

 

[singlesliceofcheese]

I can't see how 75 miles distance would make it a different market, and if it was a different market the game would never take place in Notre Dame.



There's no market anywhere in Europe for outdoor NHL games. What it would be is a gloomy event in front of 20,000 spectators somewhere in Finland.

Markets aren't only defined by location. Evidently, this is an imperative metric, but there's more to it than just such. The television market there is also dictated by the Blues. Can you stop beating this point? I literally conceded that the two are divergent.

I never said there was a market, so I understand this. Either way, how do you know that only 20,000 spectators would show? Seems like there's a lot of assuming going on.

 

[Albatros]

I never said there was a market, so I understand this. Either way, how do you know that only 20,000 spectators would show? Seems like there's a lot of assuming going on.

The domestic ones in Finland and Sweden between the most established of fan bases have been similar to the AHL outdoor events in terms of popularity.

 

[singlesliceofcheese]

The domestic ones in Finland and Sweden between the most established of fan bases have been similar to the AHL outdoor events in terms of popularity.

The Liiga games at Helsinki Olympic have produced crowds larger than 20,000. Two of which had near or passed 35,000. The only AHL game I can think of that eclipsed this was the 2012 game, whereby this was an unusual showing. The games at Ullevi haven't been that successful, so you may have a point there.

 

[Albatros]

The Liiga games at Helsinki Olympic have produced crowds larger than 20,000. Two of which had near or passed 35,000. The only AHL game I can think of that eclipsed this was the 2012 game, whereby this was an unusual showing. The games at Ullevi haven't been that successful, so you may have a point there.

The only Liiga games like that were the very first modern-day outdoor games in Finland though and at the same time local derbies between the two most supported teams. Even that event wasn't as well attended for the final time in 2014 anymore. The latest outdoor game in Helsinki drew a crowd of 16,000 in 2017 and in Tampere of 8,500 in 2016. The NHL would somehow have to come up with a much bigger event or the optics would be just dreary, and at the same time the tickets can not cost more than for an indoor game or they will not fill a stadium even if it's just one-off.