NHL Local (Not National) TV Contracts By Value

[liveschedules]

Hi, guys.

I'm trying to put together a list of how much each NHL team earns from its local TV contract, or at least find out the league average. There have been previous attempts to do this here (link) and there (link), but the info on the old threads is somewhat dated now. As most of you know, the NHL recently signed vastly improved national rights deals in both Canada and the US. It stands to reason that the size of local TV agreements has gone up a bit too.

The best data I've found is from this Forbes article (link), published in Nov 2013. Unfortunately, it only shows the ten teams with the highest-value contracts*:

*Update: new contracts added.

1. Montreal Canadiens - $61m/year ($68m CAD) (RDS); runs through 2025-26; (new deal starts next season; up from $33/year)
2. Toronto Maple Leafs - $41m/year (Sportsnet, TSN, Leafs TV); through 2014-15.
3. New York Rangers - $35m (MSG Network)
4. Ottawa Senators - $30m ($33m CAD) (TSN/RDS); through 2025-26; (deal starts next season: up from $10/yr)
5. Detroit Red Wings - $30m (Fox Sports Detroit); through 2018-19 or 19-20 (not sure)
6. Vancouver Canucks - $25m (Sportsnet Pacific, Sportsnet One); through 22-23 season
7. New York Islanders - $24m (MSG Network); through 2030-31
8. New Jersey Devils - $24m (MSG Network); through 2024-25
9. Dallas Stars - $20m (Fox Sports Southwest); ends this season
10. Los Angeles Kings - $20m (Fox Sports West); through 23-24
11. Pittsburgh Penguins - $18m (Root Sports); through 28-29

The annual average for those teams is $29.8m USD* (updated since original post). However, I've had a hard time finding reliable numbers for the other nineteen. In news articles and press releases about contract signings and extensions, dollar amounts are often not mentioned. For example, the Coyotes announced the signing of a 12-year deal with Fox Sports Arizona last November, but were conspicuously mum on how much they were going to be paid.

We all know that the smallest teams in the NHL don't make much from local TV deals. However, it would be nice to know whether teams at the very bottom make only a little less than other teams in the bottom third, or are extreme outliers that depress the league average. If any of you happen to remember hearing or reading about your teams' local TV contract, please post here. (PS: This is my first post. Thanks for bearing with me so far.)

Click to read more...

 

[Swarez]

Ottawa is going from 10.2 Million this year to $33 Million next year (both French and English).
Montreal is in the last year of there deal, they signed a new one for a monster # just not sure what it is.

Here is a link to the Ottawa deal, $400 Million over 12 years.
http://www.ottawasun.com/2014/01/29/live-sens-announce-massive-tv-deal-hit-ice-for-practice

I am going to go out on a limb, Toronto will be looking for 100/million a year for a local TV contract in 2 years if Ottawa is gettomg 33/year

 

[liveschedules]

Thank you! That's exactly the kind of info I was looking for. I wasn't able to find out how much Montreal's new deal is worth, but it looks like it's a 12-year contract that'll last through the 2025-26 season (I'll update the table later with whatever info I can find). If Ottawa went from $10.2m to $33m per year, I'd be amazed if Montreal ($33m per year from the *old* contract) didn't move up to #1.

 

[Swarez]

Thank you! That's exactly the kind of info I was looking for. I wasn't able to find out how much Montreal's new deal is worth, but it looks like it's a 12-year contract that'll last through the 2025-26 season (I'll update the table later with whatever info I can find). If Ottawa went from $10.2m to $33m per year, I'd be amazed if Montreal ($33m per year from the *old* contract) didn't move up to #1.

I did some googling and on certain blogs they say Montreal a new french/English combined deal is worth 75/million a year. Since they were just blogs (mostly in french) I didn't want to post since they are most likely wrong.

I do remember hearing on the radio when Montreal signed they have the biggest deal until Toronto re-upps.

 

[scotchex]

Here's a question I've wondered -- if you add up all the national and regional TV ratings -- how many Americans watch an NHL game on an average game day?

 

[liveschedules]

Thanks again. $75m a year would surprise me - but it doesn't seem implausible, especially if that money is in CAD (it'd be about $68m USD). I have to say that the league appears to be healthier than I thought it was when I started looking at these numbers. The big remaining problem is that Canadian money still subsidizes the rest of the league. In a hypothetical US-only NHL where $200m (the annual value of NBC's deal with the NHL) was distributed to 23 American teams, each team would receive only $8.7m from national TV rights. The Rangers and other teams that make decent money from their local TV deals would be OK, but the Rust Belt teams would struggle.

 

[liveschedules]

Here's a question I've wondered -- if you add up all the national and regional TV ratings -- how many Americans watch an NHL game on an average game day?

I'm not sure. I think the number would *look* worse than it is. These days, the highest rated program on cable in a given week is pretty much always The Walking Dead. And that gets about 10m viewers, something like 3% of the US population. The next highest-rated show usually gets only about half the number of viewers. It's hard to overstate how balkanized the TV audience is these days. But that means the definition of success has changed too. If you look at ratings from last week, you can see that the audience for even the NBA All-Star game is pretty small:

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...-for-the-week-ending-february-16-2014/237765/

 

[Morris Wanchuk]

Got to love Jacobs.. his yearly contact with NESN is probably $1.. Keep that HRR down!

 

[IU Hawks fan]

Got to love Jacobs.. his yearly contact with NESN is probably $1.. Keep that HRR down!

Doesn't work that way. The league would step in and add a charge of the 'market value' to HRR.

 

[Swarez]

Thanks again. $75m a year would surprise me - but it doesn't seem implausible, especially if that money is in CAD (it'd be about $68m USD). I have to say that the league appears to be healthier than I thought it was when I started looking at these numbers. The big remaining problem is that Canadian money still subsidizes the rest of the league. In a hypothetical US-only NHL where $200m (the annual value of NBC's deal with the NHL) was distributed to 23 American teams, each team would receive only $8.7m from national TV rights. The Rangers and other teams that make decent money from their local TV deals would be OK, but the Rust Belt teams would struggle.

Well I found a decent source, radio-canada (french CBC)

Habs french only deal is 816/12 or 68 million per. Not sure if that's CDN OR US $. There english regional deal is on top of this.

http://blogues.radio-canada.ca/bloguesportif/2013/12/27/rds-les-droits-regionaux-du-ch-ont-coute-plus-de-800-millions/

 

[liveschedules]

Well I found a decent source, radio-canada (french CBC)

Habs french only deal is 816/12 or 68 million per. Not sure if that's CDN OR US $. There english regional deal is on top of this.

http://blogues.radio-canada.ca/bloguesportif/2013/12/27/rds-les-droits-regionaux-du-ch-ont-coute-plus-de-800-millions/

Thank you. The article was surprisingly readable via Google Translate. Here's a sample:

"And advertising revenues will surely melt like snow in the sun due to the disappearance of 22 national games (broadcast on Saturdays, Sundays and Wednesdays) and playoff games, which are the most lucrative of the year."

Does that look like a computer translation to you? I'm amazed.

 

[Taze em]

The Blackhawks are a noticeable omission in OP's list. Does anyone know when their deal is up? Judging by the new household numbers that came out they should be the #1 American team whenever the sweetheart "get you back on TV after Dollar Bill" deal is up.

 

[Teemu]

The Blackhawks are a noticeable omission in OP's list. Does anyone know when their deal is up? Judging by the new household numbers that came out they should be the #1 American team whenever the sweetheart "get you back on TV after Dollar Bill" deal is up.

None of the CSNs are, probably because the teams are co-owners

 

[liveschedules]

The Blackhawks are a noticeable omission in OP's list. Does anyone know when their deal is up? Judging by the new household numbers that came out they should be the #1 American team whenever the sweetheart "get you back on TV after Dollar Bill" deal is up.

I'm just an amateur who started looking into this kind of stuff a few weeks ago, but I know Chicago's situation is a bit weird because a sizable minority of their games are shown on free television. Most non-NFL teams in the US have exclusive deals with regional sports networks. The Bulls have the same kind of arrangement and they have only the 8th best local TV deal in the NBA, despite being the third most valuable franchise according to Forbes.

I'd love to know what the Flyers are making.

 

[CHIP72]

I'm just an amateur who started looking into this kind of stuff a few weeks ago, but I know Chicago's situation is a bit weird because a sizable minority of their games are shown on free television. Most non-NFL teams in the US have exclusive deals with regional sports networks. The Bulls have the same kind of arrangement and they have only the 8th best local TV deal in the NBA, despite being the third most valuable franchise according to Forbes.

I'd love to know what the Flyers are making.

Yeah, you have to figure with the Comcast Corporation/CSN Philadelphia/Ed Snider connection the Flyers have a high value contract.

 

[gordie]

Hi, guys.

I'm trying to put together a list of how much each NHL team earns from its local TV contract, or at least find out the league average. There have been previous attempts to do this here (link) and there (link), but the info on the old threads is somewhat dated now. As most of you know, the NHL recently signed vastly improved national rights deals in both Canada and the US. It stands to reason that the size of local TV agreements has gone up a bit too.

The best data I've found is from this Forbes article (link), published in Nov 2013. Unfortunately, it only shows the ten teams with the highest-value contracts:

1. Toronto Maple Leafs - $41m/year (from Sportsnet, TSN, Leafs TV); runs through 2014-15.
2. New York Rangers - $35m (from MSG Network);
3. Montreal Canadiens - $33m (Reseau des Sport); through 2013-14
4. Detroit Red Wings - $30m (Fox Sports Detroit); through 2018-19 or 19-20 (not sure)
5. Vancouver Canucks - $25m (Sportsnet Pacific, Sportsnet One); through 22-23 season
6. New York Islanders - $24m (MSG Network); through 2030-31
7. New Jersey Devils - $24m (MSG Network); through 2024-25
8. Dallas Stars - $20m (Fox Sports Southwest); ends this season
9. Los Angeles Kings - $20m (Fox Sports West); through 23-24
10. Pittsburgh Penguins - $18m (Root Sports); through 28-29

The annual average for those teams is $27.1m (USD). However, I've had a hard time finding reliable numbers for the other twenty. In news articles and press releases about contract signings and extensions, dollar amounts are often not mentioned. For example, the Coyotes announced the signing of a 12-year deal with Fox Sports Arizona last November, but were conspicuously mum on how much they were going to be paid.

We all know that the smallest teams in the NHL don't make much from local TV deals. However, it would be nice to know whether teams at the very bottom make only a little less than other teams in the bottom third, or are extreme outliers that depress the league average. If any of you happen to remember hearing or reading about your teams' local TV contract, please post here. (PS: This is my first post. Thanks for bearing with me so far.)

This why both the Islanders and Devils really never seriously considered moving despite the financial issues they've had.

 

[IU Hawks fan]

The Blackhawks are a noticeable omission in OP's list. Does anyone know when their deal is up? Judging by the new household numbers that came out they should be the #1 American team whenever the sweetheart "get you back on TV after Dollar Bill" deal is up.

None of the CSNs are, probably because the teams are co-owners

I'm just an amateur who started looking into this kind of stuff a few weeks ago, but I know Chicago's situation is a bit weird because a sizable minority of their games are shown on free television. Most non-NFL teams in the US have exclusive deals with regional sports networks. The Bulls have the same kind of arrangement and they have only the 8th best local TV deal in the NBA, despite being the third most valuable franchise according to Forbes.

I'd love to know what the Flyers are making.

The Hawks payout with CSN is a complete mystery. We do know the contract with all 4 teams runs through the 2019 seasons.

I recently discovered that the Sox and Cubs are paid $450,000 per game:
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/dodgers-send-shock-waves-through-local-tv-landscape/

Hypothetically, let's say it's the same (no idea if that's true, and it may be significantly lower). That puts them at $22.5 million for 50 games. Then you add what they get for ~20 games on WGN, which I have no idea of.

 

[Kane One]

Does anyone know how the negotiating works between MSG and the Rangers? They are both owned by the same company, so I'm wondering how they figured out the number. Also, do the Knicks get the same amount from MSG?

 

[Stats01]

Thank you! That's exactly the kind of info I was looking for. I wasn't able to find out how much Montreal's new deal is worth, but it looks like it's a 12-year contract that'll last through the 2025-26 season (I'll update the table later with whatever info I can find). If Ottawa went from $10.2m to $33m per year, I'd be amazed if Montreal ($33m per year from the *old* contract) didn't move up to #1.

Montreal will be #1 for a very short time, and then Toronto will re-up their deal and morph over everyone else again. Toronto could be the first team to hit 100 million a year. They'll be close to 70 IMO in this contract.

 

[cheswick]

Montreal will be #1 for a very short time, and then Toronto will re-up their deal and morph over everyone else again. Toronto could be the first team to hit 100 million a year. They'll be close to 70 IMO in this contract.

Toronto is owned by two media companies. There will be no re-upping of a deal. Their local rights will be shared between Rogers and Bell. There will have to be an arbitrary $ value attached to it for CBA purposes but it will be as low as reasonably allowed.

 

[Colin226]

This why both the Islanders and Devils really never seriously considered moving despite the financial issues they've had.

And this was before the other 2 local sports networks were really one the scene.. I think YES showed some interest in the Devils but then Dolan came in with a mega-offer that the Devils had to take.. Just wait until all 3 local networks go to bid on those rights!

 

[jkrdevil]

And this was before the other 2 local sports networks were really one the scene.. I think YES showed some interest in the Devils but then Dolan came in with a mega-offer that the Devils had to take.. Just wait until all 3 local networks go to bid on those rights!

In the Devils case i believe they did have all three bod. SNY was in the middle of starting up when the Devils had their negotiations following the lockout. IIRC, it was a bidding war between them and MSG.

 

[liveschedules]

The Hawks payout with CSN is a complete mystery. We do know the contract with all 4 teams runs through the 2019 seasons.

Yep. The lack of transparency in these multi-team deals has been driving me nuts.

Does anyone know how the negotiating works between MSG and the Rangers? They are both owned by the same company, so I'm wondering how they figured out the number. Also, do the Knicks get the same amount from MSG?

I'd like to think that there's some league oversight in these deals. At first I thought there might be a natural disincentive for companies to overpay the teams they own due to revenue sharing, but I don't think earnings from the sale of local TV rights is subject to revenue sharing in the NHL (or in the NBA for that matter).

According to Forbes, the Knicks' local TV deal is worth $37m per year, which is only a little higher than the Rangers' $35m/year. But the Knicks have *much* higher annual revenues ($287m vs $131m) and not only because the NBA makes more than the NHL from national TV rights. The Knicks make much more from gate receipts too ($125m/year vs $51m/year). It makes you wonder whether the difference in the value of the local TV deals shouldn't be greater.

 

[liveschedules]

This why both the Islanders and Devils really never seriously considered moving despite the financial issues they've had.

No kidding. Three of the top eight - and more pertinently three of the top four American - teams on the list are in the NYC/NJ area. And they're all paid by MSG too.

 

[frivolousz21]

Yep. The lack of transparency in these multi-team deals has been driving me nuts.



I'd like to think that there's some league oversight in these deals. At first I thought there might be a natural disincentive for companies to overpay the teams they own due to revenue sharing, but I don't think earnings from the sale of local TV rights is subject to revenue sharing in the NHL (or in the NBA for that matter).

According to Forbes, the Knicks' local TV deal is worth $37m per year, which is only a little higher than the Rangers' $35m/year. But the Knicks have *much* higher annual revenues ($287m vs $131m) and not only because the NBA makes more than the NHL from national TV rights. The Knicks make much more from gate receipts too ($125m/year vs $51m/year). It makes you wonder whether the difference in the value of the local TV deals shouldn't be greater.

The Rangers certainly have better demo numbers in terms of HH income.

By how much is anyone's guess. But it probably helps.