NHL TV Ratings and Revenue

Status
Not open for further replies.

Pens75

Pens Fan Since 1975
Jul 30, 2005
2,948
0
Duquesne Gardens
For the record, I could care less if Pittsburgh ranked 10th in TV ratings (although being at the top helps with this arena situation), it's the largely populated NHL cities Gary should be worried about. As much as I hate to say it, the NHL needs ESPN, as bad as they are, as bad as the coverage has been at times, they need them if they plan on having any more interest generated growth in the U.S. down the road.
 

kdb209

Registered User
Jan 26, 2005
14,870
6
Again, as I said below, that figure is hardly proving much of anything because it fails to take into account NJ, Southern upstate NY, Connecticut, and (I think) Long Island TV ratings (all of which are the market area for Rangers, Devils, and Islanders games). I think that that 7M number is JUST NYC, because there is no way in hell that only 7M people have TVs in all of those areas I listed unless this is 1950.

The New York DMA is 7.4M households, not 7.4M population. The average household is about 2.<something> people, so you are looking at about 15-20+M population, which comes close to the New York Metro Area population. Note also that there is not a 1:1 correspondence between the New York Neilsen DMA and the US Census Bureau's "New York--Northern New Jersey--Long Island, NY--NJ--CT--PA CMSA" (2000 population 21.2M).

A DMA map shows that the New York DMA includes:
- the 5 boroughs of NYC
- Long Island (Nassau and Suffolk counties)
- 7 counties in upstate New York
- 13 counties in New Jersey
- one county each in PA and CT

http://www.truckads.com/Affiliate/New_York.htm#map
http://www.truckads.com/Markets/DMA_New_York.htm

29 COUNTIES IN THIS DESIGNATED MARKET AREA - DMA
Fairfield, CT ~ Bergen, NJ ~ Essex, NJ ~ Hudson, NJ ~ Hunterdon, NJ ~ Middlesex, NJ ~ Monmouth, NJ ~ Morris, NJ ~
Ocean, NJ ~ Passaic, NJ ~ Somerset, NJ ~ Sussex, NJ ~ Union, NJ ~ Warren, NJ ~ Bronx, NY ~ Dutchess, NY ~
Kings, NY ~ Nassau, NY ~ New York, NY ~ Orange, NY ~ Putnam, NY ~ Queens, NY ~ Richmond, NY ~
Rockland, NY ~ Suffolk, NY ~ Sullivan, NY ~ Ulster, NY ~ Westchester, NY ~ Pike, PA
 

MAROONSRoad

f/k/a Ghost
Feb 24, 2007
4,067
0
Maroons Rd.
Note also, that for many/most US RSN cable deals, there is not necessarily a corellation between ratings and revenues. Typically a team and RSN have negotiated medium to long term cable deals with pre determined rights fees that are not directly linked to ratings (until the next contract negotiations).

The poster child for this are the New York Islanders, who's longterm cable deal (a many time renegotiated and extended extension of their original Sportschannel deal signed by Torrey/Pickett and Dolan in the late 70's) pays them $17M+ per season thru 2030.

Most of the revenues for the RSNs do not come from advertising revenue, but from per subscriber rights fees paid by the cable company to the RSN, so there is not even a hard link between ratings and RSN revenues. RSNs need programming, and 70-80 NHL games fill a good bit of their schedule, even if their ratings aren't always the greatest.

That's a very good point, kdb209. What I would like to know is did the lawyers for such RSNs and the team(s) agree to any break clauses or performance targets in such a long-dated and lucurative contract(s). I would almost consider it professional negligence if they did not, but I'm speaking as a non-expert on the terms of such broadcasting contracts. Do you have any idea? Also, what other franchises are likely to have such deals (not including teams that are owned by RSN such as the Rangers and Flyers)?

Thanks,

GHOST
 

kdb209

Registered User
Jan 26, 2005
14,870
6
That's a very good point, kdb209. What I would like to know is did the lawyers for such RSNs and the team(s) agree to any break clauses or performance targets in such a long-dated and lucurative contract(s). I would almost consider it professional negligence if they did not, but I'm speaking as a non-expert on the terms of such broadcasting contracts. Do you have any idea? Also, what other franchises are likely to have such deals (not including teams that are owned by RSN such as the Rangers and Flyers)?

Thanks,

GHOST
I can't speak in general, but it is my understanding that the Islander cable deal is pretty much ironclad. During the aborted sale of the Isles to John Spano (later convicted of fraud) in 1997, the cable deal was actually more valuable than the team iself - the Islander franchise was valued at $80M, the cable deal $85M.
 

MAROONSRoad

f/k/a Ghost
Feb 24, 2007
4,067
0
Maroons Rd.

Interesting reading, Corban.

Here's an excerpt from a recent article in the Toronto Star that quotes Cuban on his visit to Toronto, where the topic of TV ratings is discussed. You might find his ideas interesting. It's also relevant to this thread.

People in the States underestimate (hockey)," he said. "More people watch Hockey Night in Canada on Saturday nights than watch NBA basketball on Thursday night in the States. People in the U.S. don't realize that. They don't realize there are more hockey fans in a country of (32.8) million than there are NBA fans in the U.S. (population 300 million).

"I'd be out there promoting the NHL's combined TV viewership in the U.S. and Canada. But it doesn't happen."

It's an interesting point. The NBA on TNT, the league's Thursday night national broadcast, averaged a 1.1 rating last season, or about one million households in the United States. Meanwhile, Hockey Night in Canada's marquee Saturday night matchup is averaging about 1.27 million viewers in the northland. If you combine that with the typical rating for a national U.S. broadcast of an NHL game on the obscure Versus network — even if it's a pittance of about 160,000 households — it represents an impressive North American audience.


http://www.thestar.com/article/171418

GHOST
 

Wooty

Registered User
Dec 31, 2006
4,029
3
Harbor City, CA
The obsession this board has with the Penguins is sad. They only have 1/30 influence in a 30 team league but you guys act like the NHL would stand so well if every team was the Pittsburgh Penguins. No discussion can ever be had if we have to compare every single thing to the Penguins and if you did it honestly, Penguin fans may not like the results. Would the NHL be better off disbanding the Penguins and sending Crosby to the Kings, Malkin to the Rangers, Staal to the Blackhawks and Fleury to the Ducks?

LA has 2 teams and the Ducks are not LA's team, the Kings are. The Duck are NOT in Los Angeles. They have as much to do with the city of Los Angeles as the NY Rangers do. Anaheim is it's own city and they have the Ducks.

The Ducks increase is because they are a good team. If you want the big city teams to have viewers, make them good.

There has to be some value to wealth of a community. Is a viewer in New York worth more then a viewer in Columbus based on income or wealth? How does LA fit into that? 2 Teams in LA the area? 3 in the NY area? Does Fox TV care if more Pittsburgh fans watch then LA Fans watch if LA Fans have more money?

How does team success corelate to ratings? Playoff history?
 

DaleCooper

NEVER 4GET
Aug 2, 2005
7,793
118
Brooklyn
www.jonathanhawkins.net
http://www.newsobserver.com/796/story/550629.html

According to FSN, last season's Hurricanes games averaged a 1.1 or 1.2 rating, with 1.0 being equivalent to 1 percent of the Triangle's television households. This season, the game broadcasts have averaged 0.9 or 1.0, said Jeff Genthner, FSN South's vice president and general manager.

Yet, Genthner pointed out, only seven of the other 21 teams with broadcast deals with FSN average better ratings than the Hurricanes. And the ratings for the new pregame and postgame shows introduced by FSN last month are better than the FSN programming they replaced.
 

MAROONSRoad

f/k/a Ghost
Feb 24, 2007
4,067
0
Maroons Rd.

Hi Vulcan91,

Thanks for posting the link. That's very useful information for this thread. I'm not sure if averaging at best 1% of TV households in the Raleigh/Durham's market of 1,006,330 households is anything to get too excited about for the home of the defending cup champions. If my math is correct, that equates to about 10,063 per game.

What I find more interesting, however, is what was pointed out by Jeff Genthner, FSN South's vice president and general manager: "only seven of the other 21 NHL teams with broadcast deals with FSN average better ratings than the Hurricanes."

It follows that, including the 'Canes, at least 14 of the NHL teams in the USA are averaging a rating equal or lower to the 0.9 or 1.0 rating Genthner estimates for the 'Canes. In otherwords, on FSN in the United States at least 14 NHL teams' local television broadcasts are averaging 1% or less of TV households in their respective markets.

:amazed:

GHOST
 
Last edited:

MAROONSRoad

f/k/a Ghost
Feb 24, 2007
4,067
0
Maroons Rd.
Some news regarding Canadian national NHL TV deals

There have been two recent stories about the next national deals in Canada, which paint a slightly different monetary picture, so I'll post the links and a few quotes here.

From the Toronto Globe and Mail:

"The CBC will pay a price for NHL rights. The league is certain to ask for a figure in the $100-million-a-year range, well up from the current $65-million. The hike is unavoidable because the CBC is currently earning a profit of about $30-million annually from hockey.

...

However, because hockey delivers in total about two million viewers to the CBC every Saturday night and produces larger numbers during the playoffs, it will pony up. At least, that's the anticipation. After all, hockey audiences help the CBC maintain an acceptable overall viewership level. And retaining Hockey Night is critical to the network's image.

If there is a protracted standoff, don't rule out CTV, the parent company of TSN, entering the picture. It's speculated it could come in and scoop up the broadcasting rights.

...

If the CBC does pay about $100-million annually, how much will TSN put on the table? With more Leafs games and a share of the Canadian content in the playoffs, $50-million doesn't seem unreasonable.

...

Rating the Weekend

Hockey. Leafs-Flyers CBC 1.37 million Above average for the season.

Hockey. Sharks-Flames CBC 707,000 Consistent with Game 2 audiences.

Hockey. Ont.-PEI Canada Winter Games CBC 166,000 Not bad for amateur hockey.

Junior hockey. Shawinigan-Drummondville Sportsnet 34,000 Not much interest."


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20070227.TRUTH27/TPStory/TPSports/Television/

The above are national ratings.

A more recent story from the Toronto Star seems to indicate the NHL won't receive as much as suggested in the Globe article:

"Canada buoys sinking NHL ratings
CBC, CTV bidding a boon to league
Feb 09, 2007 04:30 AM

...despite terrible television ratings in the U.S. and decreased TV audiences in Canada, things are looking up for the NHL.

First, Versus has extended its NHL deal through the 2007-08 season, adding $72 million to the league's coffers and may soon add another three years to that.

Secondly, sometime in the next month or so, the CBC and CTVglobemedia will fatten the league's annual television income by another $25 million a year.

Although the latter made a serious bid to end CBC's 55-year stranglehold on Hockey Night In Canada, it says here the people's network will retain its sugar daddy.

It's still possible that a last-minute knock-your-socks-off proposal from CTV could change things. But all indications are that CBC will hang on to its Saturday night package.

The difference is that the public network will pay a lot more than it had planned, upwards of $70 million a season – about $15 million a year more than its last deal.

Meanwhile, the folks at CTV-TSN will also be paying more than the $25 million a year they paid on the last deal, though they will be getting a lot more for their money."


http://www.thestar.com/article/179976
 
Last edited:

Alpine

Registered User
Oct 28, 2005
2,150
2
Moncton, NB
Ghostsof.......
I was wondering if there is any available French language ratings, of games played last week?
The HABS game and the Volts/Cataractes game. With close to 7 million Canadians listing French as their 1st language it would be interesting to add French language broadcasts to the national ratings.
Not to defend Junior hockey but I'm sure the RDS broadcast of Volts and Cats would be interesting as this game would of been of interest mostly in Quebec and Atlantic. And the vast majority of French speakers live in Quebec and Nouveau-Brunswick. Over 6.1 million of the 6.8 million nationaly. Or to put it another way, of the about 10 million that live in Quebec and Atlantic about 6.2 million list French as their 1st language. This was a Q game.
Anyways, just wondering if there are any ratings for games broadcast in French?
EDIT:
What does RDS pay for Habs, Sens, other NHL games?
 
Last edited:

TheDanceOfMaternity

Registered User
Jul 13, 2006
6,710
107
San Francisco, CA
Can anyone tell me what the sharks TV ratings are locally and where they rank? They get more people at their games than the warriors and sometimes the A's but the newspapers do all they can do forget about them.
 

EbencoyE

Registered User
Nov 26, 2006
1,958
5
Rangers have Jagr and an enormous population, what is their excuse for poor ratings?

A lot more to do in NYC than there is in Pittsburgh or Buffalo.

And the Rangers fanbase is also a lot more spread out than most other teams. I'm guessing you don't realize just how big the New York metropolitan area is. Whereas a team like Pittsburgh will have most of it's fans in the actual Pittsburgh area.

For example, I live 15 minutes outside of Orlando. But I'm NOT apart of the Orlando metropolitan area, so therefore I would not count towards the Orlando Magic's TV ratings. (Not that I'd watch the NBA anyway)
 

kdb209

Registered User
Jan 26, 2005
14,870
6
A lot more to do in NYC than there is in Pittsburgh or Buffalo.

And the Rangers fanbase is also a lot more spread out than most other teams. I'm guessing you don't realize just how big the New York metropolitan area is. Whereas a team like Pittsburgh will have most of it's fans in the actual Pittsburgh area.

For example, I live 15 minutes outside of Orlando. But I'm NOT apart of the Orlando metropolitan area, so therefore I would not count towards the Orlando Magic's TV ratings. (Not that I'd watch the NBA anyway)
Unless you drive REALLY fast, you very likely do count for the Orlando Magic's TV ratings. Again DMA != Metro Area.

For Orlando, the ORLANDO DAYTONA BEACH MELBOURNE, FLORIDA DMA consists of:

http://www.truckads.com/Affiliate/Orlando_Daytona_Beach_Melbourne.htm
9 COUNTIES IN THIS DMA
Brevard, FL ~ Flagler, FL ~ Lake, FL ~ Marion, FL ~ Orange, FL ~ Osceola, FL ~ Seminole, FL ~ Sumter, FL ~ Volusia, FL

Unless you are South West of Orlando into Polk County (which looks like significantly more than 15 min on Mapquest) you are in the Orlando DMA.
 

MAROONSRoad

f/k/a Ghost
Feb 24, 2007
4,067
0
Maroons Rd.
2006 Stanley Cup Playoff TV Ratings

2006 Stanley Cup Playoff TV Ratings

I dug up some of the US Local and National TV Ratings for the Stanley Cup Eastern Conference Finals between the Hurricanes and Sabres and Stanley Cup Finals between the Hurricanes and the Oilers (not completed, though).

According to the News & Observer (Raleigh) about 4 to 5% of television households (about 1 household for every 20 or 25) in the Raleigh/Durham market watched the Eastern Conference finals between the 'Canes and Sabres, while in Buffalo 20 to 30% (1 household for every 3 to 5 households) watched the game.

Market size:

RALEIGH-DURHAM MARKET: 985,200 television households

BUFFALO MARKET: 644,000 television households

"Buffalo fans are tuned in

Danny Hooley, Staff Writer

Television ratings for the first three games of the Stanley Cup playoffs have been unimpressive in the 22-county Raleigh-Durham TV market and dismal nationally. In Buffalo, though, people are watching:

MAY 20, NBC

RALEIGH: 4.4 (43,350 viewers)

BUFFALO: 31.0 (199,640 viewers)

NATIONAL: 1.0 (1.1 million viewers)

MAY 22, OLN

RALEIGH: 5.1 (50,250 viewers)

BUFFALO: 23.6 (151,980 viewers)

NATIONAL: .64 (705,280 viewers)

MAY 24, OLN

RALEIGH: 4.2 (41,380 viewers)

BUFFALO: 20.1 (129,440 viewers)

NATIONAL: .78 (859,560 viewers)

HOUSEHOLDS

NATIONAL: 110.2 million television households

RALEIGH-DURHAM MARKET: 985,200 television households

BUFFALO MARKET: 644,000 television households

A RATINGS POINT EQUALS 1 PERCENT OF TELEVISION HOUSEHOLDS

(NBC, WRAL-TV, WIVB-TV4 (BUFFALO), OLN)
"

http://www.newsobserver.com/796/story/443758.html


The ratings improved in Raleigh/Durham market for the Finals with the Oilers. Whereas 1 household in every 20 to 25 watch the 'Canes defeat the Sabres in the Eastern Conference finals, for the first two games of the SC Finals 11% of the household in the Raleigh/Durham market watched the Stanley Cup Finals. Nationally in the USA, about 0.9 % watched the games.

"RATINGS SPIKE IN TRIANGLELocally, at least, TV ratings for hockey are looking up since the Stanley Cup playoffs in May.

The first two games of the finals saw a 6- to 7-point jump in viewership in the 22-county Raleigh-Durham market. The national numbers continued to hover around the 1-point mark. In both cases, the June ratings numbers repeated over both nights.

Ratings information for the Edmonton ratings market was unavailable at press time.

JUNE 5, OLN

Raleigh: 11.0 (108,370 viewers)

National: 0.9 (991,800 viewers)

JUNE 7, OLN

Raleigh: 11.0 (108,370 viewers)

National: 0.9 (991,800 viewers)

HOUSEHOLDS

National: 110.2 million television households

Raleigh-Durham market: 985,200 television households

A RATINGS POINT EQUALS 1 PERCENT OF TELEVISION HOUSEHOLDS

COMPILED BY DANNY HOOLEY SOURCE: GARY GALLOWAY, WRAL-TV
"

For Game 4 the series moved from OLN to NBC and the ratings improved marginally both locally and nationally:

"Locally and nationally, the move from cable TV's OLN to major network NBC gave the Stanley Cup a small bump in the ratings Saturday night.

The two previous games on OLN both drew an average 11.0 locally and 0.9 nationally on June 5 and 7 -- roughly 108,370 viewers in the Raleigh-Durham market and 991,800 viewers across the U.S.

Here are the numbers from Saturday:

JUNE 10, NBC (WNCN NBC-17 IN RALEIGH-DURHAM)

RALEIGH: 12.1 (119,200 viewers)

NATIONAL: 1.7 (1.9 million viewers)

HOUSEHOLDS

NATIONAL: 110.2 million television households

RALEIGH-DURHAM MARKET: 985,200 television households

A RATINGS POINT EQUALS 1 PERCENT OF TELEVISION HOUSEHOLDS

(GARY GALLOWAY, WRAL-TV; NBC UNIVERSAL)
"

Game 5

NBC 2.7/5 average for the night with a 3.0/5 in the 9:00 hour, and the Game 5 rating was down 9.4 percent from the comparable telecast two seasons ago.

[I will add more data if I can find it; if anyone has Edmonton's local ratings please let me know]

GHOST
 

MAROONSRoad

f/k/a Ghost
Feb 24, 2007
4,067
0
Maroons Rd.
Recent Trends in U.S. TV Ratings

The NHL's already miniscule TV ratings have been trending downwards for past ten years or so as indicated in the various charts below:

Note: A rating of 1 equals 1% of TV Households in the USA. For example, the rating of 3.4 for the 1995 Stanley Cup Finals between New Jersey and Detroit represents an audience of 3.4% of American TV households and the the ratings of 0.9 and 2.3 for the 2006 Stanley Cup Finals between Carolina and Edmonton represent an audience of 0.9% of American TV households for the first two games shown exclusively on OLN and an audience of 2.3% of American TV households for the final 5 games shown exclusively on NBC.

U.S. NHL TV Ratings

Stanley Cup Finals
Year Network Teams Games Carried Rating
1995 Fox New Jersey-Detroit 2 3.4
1996 Fox Colorado-Florida 2 3.6
1997 Fox Detroit-Philadelphia 1 4.0
1998 Fox Detroit-Washington 1 3.3
1999 Fox Dallas-Buffalo 3 3.4
2000 ABC New Jersey-Dallas 4 3.7
2001 ABC Colorado-New Jersey 5 3.3
2002 ABC Detroit-Carolina 3 3.6
2003 ABC New Jersey-Anaheim 5 2.9
2004 ABC Tampa Bay-Calgary 5 2.6
2006 NBC Carolina-Edmonton 5 2.3
2006 OLN Carolina-Edmonton 2 0.9

Regular Season Network Ratings
Season Network # of Dates Rating
1994-95 Fox 5 2.0
1995-96 Fox 6 2.1
1996-97 Fox 6 1.9
1997-98 Fox 11 1.4
1998-99 Fox 11 1.4
1999-00 ABC 4 1.3
2000-01 ABC 5 1.1
2001-02 ABC 5 1.4
2002-03 ABC 5 1.1
2003-04 ABC 5 1.1
2005-06 NBC 6 1.0
2006-07 NBC - - [not available/to be added]

Regular Season Cable Ratings
Season Network Rating Network Rating
2001-02 ESPN 0.49 ESPN2 0.23
2002-03 ESPN 0.46 ESPN2 0.23
2003-04 ESPN 0.47 ESPN2 0.24
2005-06 OLN 0.20
2006-07 Versus 0.20

NHL All-Star Game Ratings
Year Network Rating
1991 NBC 2.7
1992 NBC 2.3
1993 NBC 2.4
1994 NBC 2.5
1995 No Game Due To Lockout
1996 Fox 4.1
1997 Fox 2.8
1998 Fox 2.7
1999 Fox 2.2
2000 ABC 2.7
2001 ABC 1.7
2002 ABC 1.8
2003 ABC 1.7
2004 ABC 1.8
2005 No Game Due To Lockout
2006 No Game Due To Olympics
2007 Versus 0.7

Sources:
http://www.andrewsstarspage.com/NHL-Business/NHL-TV-Ratings.htm
http://www.rctimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070130/SPORTS02/701300355/1002/MTCN0302
http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/news;_y...LYF?slug=ap-all-starratings&prov=ap&type=lgns


GHOST
 
Last edited:

MAROONSRoad

f/k/a Ghost
Feb 24, 2007
4,067
0
Maroons Rd.
Comparison with other major leagues: NHL the "gate driven league"

The Washington Post claims that the NHL receives only 3% of its revenue from national TV license fees. This contrasts to the NFL which receives 66% of its revenue from TV.

"The NFL earns nearly $4 billion each year in national television rights fees, which earns each team well in excess of $100 million a year. And Major League Baseball and the NBA earn more than $700 million a year from national television rights, of which teams receive more than $20 million apiece. By contrast, the NHL national rights fee contract with OLN amounts to about $2 million per team.

Measured another way, the NHL will earn about 3 percent of its revenue from national television this year. The NBA's and MLB's share of national television revenue is well into the double digits, and the NFL's television revenue is about 66 percent of the total league-wide earnings.
"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/04/AR2006060400897.html

However, this is an example of incorrect reporting by a newspaper. It's not quite that bad. The author does not account for the Canadian National TV Rights Fees paid by CBC/HNIC, TSN and RDS (French language broadcasts). A more realistic estimate is that about 7% of the NHL's revenue is derived from national TV right fees. Also, that percentage figure is set to go up due to the current renegotiation of the HNIC and TSN deals.


GHOST
 
Last edited:

GSC2k2*

Guest
The Washington Post claims that the NHL receives only 3% of its revenue from national TV license fees. This contrasts to the NFL which receives 66% of its revenue from TV.

"The NFL earns nearly $4 billion each year in national television rights fees, which earns each team well in excess of $100 million a year. And Major League Baseball and the NBA earn more than $700 million a year from national television rights, of which teams receive more than $20 million apiece. By contrast, the NHL national rights fee contract with OLN amounts to about $2 million per team.

Measured another way, the NHL will earn about 3 percent of its revenue from national television this year. The NBA's and MLB's share of national television revenue is well into the double digits, and the NFL's television revenue is about 66 percent of the total league-wide earnings.
"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/04/AR2006060400897.html

However, this is an example of incorrect reporting by a newspaper. It's not quite that bad. The author does not account for the Canadian National TV Rights Fees paid by CBC/HNIC, TSN and RDS (French language broadcasts). A more realistic estimate is that about 7% of the NHL's revenue is derived from national TV right fees. Also, that percentage figure is set to go up due to the current renegotiation of the HNIC and TSN deals.


GHOST
Don't forget that national rights fees are but a small portion of the TV picture for the NHL. Those figures - mistaken as they are, as you point out - do not include the lucrative local TV deals that the NHL teams have. While the other leagues have earned their $$$ from natioanl deals, the NHL teams have focused on the NHL as a local market-by-market product. For example, the numbers do not include the Islanders' giant deal. Every team has local deals which kick in millions as well.

In 2002-03, the NHL collectively earned $449 million from "broadcasting and new media revenue" out of a total of $1.996 billion, or 22% of total revenue (source: Levitt report). I have no further breakdown, but the US national TV Deal at the time was $120 million/yr (source: Andrew's Stars Page). In any event, you see the point.
 

Alpine

Registered User
Oct 28, 2005
2,150
2
Moncton, NB
Don't forget that national rights fees are but a small portion of the TV picture for the NHL. Those figures - mistaken as they are, as you point out - do not include the lucrative local TV deals that the NHL teams have. While the other leagues have earned their $$$ from natioanl deals, the NHL teams have focused on the NHL as a local market-by-market product. For example, the numbers do not include the Islanders' giant deal. Every team has local deals which kick in millions as well.

In 2002-03, the NHL collectively earned $449 million from "broadcasting and new media revenue" out of a total of $1.996 billion, or 22% of total revenue (source: Levitt report). I have no further breakdown, but the US national TV Deal at the time was $120 million/yr (source: Andrew's Stars Page). In any event, you see the point.

Alot of what you say is true. It is also true that the nay sayers and those that wish hockey in the US of A to be greater conveniently leave outta their arguments.
The NHL is the only true North American pro sports league and Canadian figures don't really apply to the others.
I've always wondered when reading the doomsday posts and comparing leagues why MLB is considered as an example. First they tried to take two teams outta the mix and then relocated one team. Also no-one ever brings up the fan success that the two Florida teams have been ;) or the stuggles in attendance of the Reds or the Pirates or the Royals. But yet we read thread after thead on stuggling NHL teams .
Basically if franchises in the NHL are struggling financially in the "new" NHL, move them, sell them!
The whole lock-out was about cost certainty not ensuring profitability.
EDIT:
Ooops I didn't mean this to be a rant :shakehead
 
Last edited:

Chileiceman

Registered User
Dec 14, 2004
9,863
709
Toronto
If the team sucks, it's totally normal that fan support will dwindle. Most of the good teams this year are doing fine attendance wise (Preds' case aside).
I'm sure even the Blackhawks would draw well if they ever have a good team again
 

Alpine

Registered User
Oct 28, 2005
2,150
2
Moncton, NB
If the team sucks, it's totally normal that fan support will dwindle. Most of the good teams this year are doing fine attendance wise (Preds' case aside).
I'm sure even the Blackhawks would draw well if they ever have a good team again

Yah, but........
It's like McDonalds, Tim Hortons, or Subway selling a franchise. They show you the formula that has worked in other places. It is now up to the franchise holder to make it work in his market.
If the franchise holder is happy with a hundred bucks instead of a million so be it.
If you can't make your store work in your market... oh well, sucks to be you. We showed you how to make it work. We'll find another franchise owner.
As much as we want to believe that fans matter. The NHL is a business and with the CBA with the cost certainty. Current revenues willl support 30 teams. If the current franchise owner can't make his/her local market profitable, it's either time to sell the franchise or move it, or even forfiet.
There's not much more the NHL can do. They've gotten cost certainty. Now it's up to the owners to go sell their team in their market, to whatever level the franchise owner needs or wants.
 
Last edited:

MAROONSRoad

f/k/a Ghost
Feb 24, 2007
4,067
0
Maroons Rd.
US regional ratings taking a dive

Some interesting comments/info from the Sports Business News blog of January 1, 2007:

‘Television ratings for Game 7 of this year’s Stanley Cup finals dropped 21 percent from the final game of the National Hockey League's last championship series two years ago.

The broadcast of the Carolina Hurricanes' 3-1 series- clinching victory over Edmonton on NBC Monday night was watched in 3.3 percent of the 110.2 million U.S. households with televisions, the network said.

…..

The five final games televised on NBC averaged a 2.3 rating, as compared to the 2.6 generated when ABC televised the final five games of the 2004 Stanley Cup playoffs, down 11%.

The ratings from OLN weren’t just bad, they were an embarrassment for the league. The first two games of the Finals were on OLN and produced identical 0.9 ratings. That translates to about 621,000 households.

…..

According to The Vancouver Province’s Tony Gallagher during last week’s NHL Board of Governors meetings held at the Breakers Hotel in West Palm Beach, those who either have hundreds of millions of dollars invested in the NHL or those representing their team owners, were appraised of the local cable ratings (regional sports networks) that suggests hockey is losing viewers at a remarkable rate, with the likely end result of the National Hockey League being perceived as a Tier II minor league sport along the same lines as Major League Soccer, the WNBA and the Arena Football League.

The area of concern isn’t the ill-conceived Versus national cable contract or the no-money down NBC agreement, but the various local television contracts. The impact won’t necessarily be on the rights fees the various regional sports networks are paying local NHL franchises in their markets, but the resulting fallout from other revenue sources; like sponsorship and arena signage rights fees. If no one is watching, those rights become worthless.

…..

According to the report, FSN Florida officials promised advertisers before the start of the season ratings for Panthers games would average 1.0. One problem as terrible as that number is to begin with, ratings are 77 percent below what was expected. In a region where grocery stores rarely carry green bananas, no one will admit they’re watching NHL hockey.

In Atlanta the Thrashers are an exciting and competitive team led by Marian Hossa one of the NHL most electrifying players…The NHL has already failed once in Atlanta and appears destined for the same fate once again. The television numbers are down a 10th of a rating point and fully 70 per cent below expectations.

The New York market remains home to three NHL franchises, at least one franchise too many for that geographical region. According to the published report, numbers are so low on Fox New York for Islanders games; the ratings numbers are not made available for distribution, something that didn’t seem possible.

One of the few American markets the bright thinkers the NHL employs (an Oxymoron if there ever was one) tries to sell media pundits on is Detroit’s label as “Hockey Town USA”. Indeed Detroit may like to believe its Hockey Town USA, but the current television ratings numbers are down almost 50 per cent over last year's figures. And last year's figures were a far cry from when the sport was going strongest in 2001.”


The article also mentions that National TV ratings are down in Canada this season; however, that's after the post-lockout season where CBC had their highest hockey ratings in ten years and TSN set an all-time seasonal ratings record.

See the whole article here:

http://sportsbiznews.blogspot.com/search/label/NHL TV ratings
 
Last edited:

MAROONSRoad

f/k/a Ghost
Feb 24, 2007
4,067
0
Maroons Rd.
Devils vs Panthers TV disaster

I admit this is cherry picking with respect to the Devils, although I'm not sure that's the case re Florida given its miniscule ratings described in the previous post.

Still, the numbers are so shocking that they deserve to be mentioned in this thread.

From the article by Richard Sandomir published in the NY Times on February 2, 2007:

"It was only one of 82 games for the Devils this season, on the road last Saturday night against the Florida Panthers. Not much will be recalled. The Panthers won, 4-2, in front of 18,136 fans at the BankAtlantic Center.

But something quite extraordinary occurred in the New York market: A hockey game broke out on MSG, but almost no one watched.

Only 736 households — a minuscule .01 rating — tuned in.

That is 736 out of nearly 7.4 million, from 7:30 to 10 p.m.

The figure is embarrassing to mull. Saturday is a low-viewing night, sure. But 736? The game didn’t face unusual competition. The Sabres-Islanders game was on FSNY, but the Rangers had played that afternoon.

.....

To find 736 homes can’t be easy for Nielsen Media Research. It is like trying to find ice chips in a haystack, Pat Buchanan supporters in my mother’s Century Village development in Boca Raton, Fla., or hair on my dome.

But these are the Devils who lead the Atlantic Division, the Devils who have won three Stanley Cups...

To be fair, the Devils don’t always draw 736 local households to their televised ice soirees. They average 13,206 (based on a .18 rating), better than the Islanders (7,336), but far worse than the Rangers (36,834).

Among all the Fox Sports Net regionals, the Red Wings lead all hockey teams, averaging a 5.0 rating and 96,915 households. But that’s Detroit. In the Miami market, about 2,000 homes watched the Devils-Panthers game on FSN Florida.


Here's the graphic the accompanied the story:

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2007/02/01/sports/20070202_SANDOMIR_GRAPHIC.html

The New York Titans lacrosse TV ratings beat the NHL that night. They bragged about it here:

http://www.laxpower.com/laxnews/news.php?story=4711

GHOST
 

Chileiceman

Registered User
Dec 14, 2004
9,863
709
Toronto
I say who cares. If you want to watch hockey, fine. If you don't, fine. The fact that other people dont care about the NHL shouldn't affect our enjoyment of the league. We need to just take the NHL for what it is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->