Should NHL Home Game Scheduling Favor "Weak Markets"?

[Retail1LO*]

At the expense of fan convenience. Personally, I prefer going to games on non-work nights. I don't see why I should lose some of those game times just to accommodate those teams who don't receive sufficient fan support. I'm already paying extremely high ticket prices, and my ticket revenue dollars are going to support those financially strapped teams...I don't see why I should lose other perks as well.

Can I get a witness from the congregation?

Amen brother.

I wonder if teams that are weak draws elsewhere, essentially drive up the ticket prices of teams that do well...knowing that they have to make their own money, plus make enough revenue to share with the red-headed stepchildren of the league.

Revenue sharing is like...communism. LOL If a team is in such bad shape that they need to be curried favor by the schedule makers so the "fans" can rationalize even attending a game...they're in bad shape. It just looks bad when your horrible attendance figures are only THAT horrible, because they're being propped up by an inordinate number of weekend home dates.

 

[danishh]

At the expense of fan convenience. Personally, I prefer going to games on non-work nights. I don't see why I should lose some of those game times just to accommodate those teams who don't receive sufficient fan support. I'm already paying extremely high ticket prices, and my ticket revenue dollars are going to support those financially strapped teams...I don't see why I should lose other perks as well.

BoH board.

does it matter to vancouver from a business standpoint, or will they still make the same amount of money, if not more because of the lower rev-sharing costs.

 

[obsenssive*]

This would do nothing. this is a red herring.

address the real issues:

marketing
marketing
marketing
visibility
marketing
community establishment
marketing
support the STH's instead of spitting in their faces
marketing

 

[danishh]

still waiting for the business downside...

 

[y2kcanucks]

still waiting for the business downside...

Okay, well you want to increase revenues, that's fine. You've pointed out this is the BoH board and in the best interest of business I think the league should be seeking out all methods to increase revenues.

As such, teams that are not supported should not be in their current markets. Right now we're seeing teams giving tickets away for free, or pricing playoff ticket cheap seats as low as $25/ticket (by contrast the Canucks cheapest playoff tickets are starting at around $150/ticket). There are currently several strong markets that are unserved. My suggestion is that we seek to relocate these unsupported teams to these unserved markets. That will definitely increase revenues, and then the NHL will not be forced to continue taking advantage of fans who support their teams.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

I wonder if teams that are weak draws elsewhere, essentially drive up the ticket prices of teams that do well...knowing that they have to make their own money, plus make enough revenue to share with the red-headed stepchildren of the league.

Economic theory would disagree with your conjecture. Teams charge as much as they can get from the fans (supply and demand).

 

[danishh]

Okay, well you want to increase revenues, that's fine. You've pointed out this is the BoH board and in the best interest of business I think the league should be seeking out all methods to increase revenues.

As such, teams that are not supported should not be in their current markets. Right now we're seeing teams giving tickets away for free, or pricing playoff ticket cheap seats as low as $25/ticket (by contrast the Canucks cheapest playoff tickets are starting at around $150/ticket). There are currently several strong markets that are unserved. My suggestion is that we seek to relocate these unsupported teams to these unserved markets. That will definitely increase revenues, and then the NHL will not be forced to continue taking advantage of fans who support their teams.

this is a very specific question and you're avoiding the issue. Well done, have you considered running in this election? If you want to discuss contraction of 'weak markets' or 'soft markets', start your own thread.

otherwise, present a business based argument against my proposal or go away.

 

[Buck Aki Berg]

At the expense of fan convenience. Personally, I prefer going to games on non-work nights. I don't see why I should lose some of those game times just to accommodate those teams who don't receive sufficient fan support. I'm already paying extremely high ticket prices, and my ticket revenue dollars are going to support those financially strapped teams...I don't see why I should lose other perks as well.

Nonsense - your ticket prices are in no way dictated by how big the welfare checks are. You won't see your ticket prices go down if the weak market teams disappear and/or improve.

...but even if that was the case, shouldn't you want to help these struggling teams by offering them more lucrative home dates? If that was to improve the market, then you wouldn't be propping up these teams anymore (even though you currently aren't)

 

[tarheelhockey]

I don't think the league should be aggressive about this, but I can see a rationale for a "tie goes to the weaker team" policy.

Basically, if the Red Wings have an open date for a road game on Thursday in either Chicago or Nashville, all else being equal why not throw Nashville a bone? Chicago sells out the game no matter when it's held, but Nashville could really benefit from a midweek sellout.

 

[Fidel Astro]

I think giving special consideration to the weaker markets would be a mistake.

That being said, I could definitely see the NHL trying it out. The league seems to have a problem with trying to appeal to new fans while completely alienating the fans they already had.

 

[LPHabsFan]

this is a very specific question and you're avoiding the issue. Well done, have you considered running in this election? If you want to discuss contraction of 'weak markets' or 'soft markets', start your own thread.

otherwise, present a business based argument against my proposal or go away.

Just jumping in here half way through and I'm pretty sure this hasn't been discussed so I'll point it out.

The only real business aspect that may or may not be affected would be TV contracts. I'm not sure whether the National contracts (ie: CBC, TSN, NBC, Versus) have any stipulations in it that require certain teams to be playing either at home or against certain teams on certain days. For example the Leafs per the CBC contract may be required to play X number of games at home on Saturday nights. Y contract value is based on X number of home games. Less than X could potentially be a drop in Y. Not sure how valid this argument is because I'm not privy to the details of the contract or the negotiations but it's the one thing that came to my mind.

 

[Mayor Bee]

Since I have it in front of me, here's the Columbus schedule notes for this year. College football has a massive impact on the sports scene in the fall here.

Before January 1 - 4 Saturday home games (Minnesota, Pittsburgh, NY Rangers, Dallas)
After January 1 - 2 Saturday home games (Edmonton, Buffalo)

Before January 1 - 5 Friday home games (Chicago, Calgary, Colorado, Detroit, Ottawa)
After January 1 - 5 Friday home games (Detroit, Colorado, Phoenix, Los Angeles, Chicago)

Before January 1 - 0 Sunday home games
After January 1 - 3 Sunday home games (New Jersey, Vancouver, St Louis)

Before January 1 - 4 Monday home games, 2 Tuesday, 3 Wednesday, 2 Thursday
After January 1 - 0 Monday, 6 Tuesday, 3 Wednesday, 1 Thursday

The pre-January 1 Friday and Saturday games, frankly, are detrimental due to the football factor. Friday attendance usually picks up in mid-November as the high school teams are eliminated (which gets more families and high schoolers to the home games), but the only Friday games between the third week of November and December 31 are the day after Thanksgiving (against Detroit) and on New Year's Eve.

In addition, having the lone home game against Pittsburgh on a Saturday night (December 4) does no one any favors. It's going to be a sellout no matter what, so there's be no harm in putting that on a Tuesday and having a different opponent on that Saturday.

The final home game cuts three ways. The last game of the regular season is a sellout, a Saturday game post-January 1 is a sellout, and a game against Buffalo is a sellout (there's a large western NY transplant population here). Instead, the lone home game against Buffalo is the last game of the regular season and it's on a Saturday.

It's not like anyone is suggesting tampering with the integrity of the game (unless it's a strawman). It's a basic business and scheduling issue. How much stronger would Atlanta's attendance be if their home games started at 7:30 instead of 7, since rush hour in Atlanta is horrid?

 

[saskganesh]

Just jumping in here half way through and I'm pretty sure this hasn't been discussed so I'll point it out.

The only real business aspect that may or may not be affected would be TV contracts. I'm not sure whether the National contracts (ie: CBC, TSN, NBC, Versus) have any stipulations in it that require certain teams to be playing either at home or against certain teams on certain days. For example the Leafs per the CBC contract may be required to play X number of games at home on Saturday nights. Y contract value is based on X number of home games. Less than X could potentially be a drop in Y. Not sure how valid this argument is because I'm not privy to the details of the contract or the negotiations but it's the one thing that came to my mind.

there is adage that nobody watches TV on Saturday nights. Except for Canadians. They have the NHL. HNIC/Saturday night hockey is a valuable property for any TV network because they know they have an audience. Without hockey, they are doing movies, reruns, reality showsanything to fill the broadcast schedule. And the networks would have to live with the transformation of one of their stronger nights on the week, to one of their weakest.

In the US, it's a bit different. The time seems to be Saturday and Sunday afternoons. and NHL ratings seem to be stronger when you have marquee, big market, Eastern time teams featured.

I would suggest that ratings would be weakened and revenues decreased by futzing with this established broadcast formula. Sure the NHL could create its own new "hockey night", but that could take some time.

 

[New User Name]

My understanding is that teams give dates to the league and based on that a schedule is made up.

Can't blame the league for teams not being able to have home games because something else is going on.

As for time of games. That's up to the individual teams. I can't see how the league dictates times (other than when NBC dictates times)

I noticed how someone sarcastically mentioned how he thinks the Leafs have more Saturday games, then I discovered that his team, the Preds have more Saturday games than the Leafs.

No matter what, someones not going to be happy. 7PM games, lots of excuses why they aren't good, can't get off work in time, traffic, need time to pick up the kids, blah, blah, blah.
8PM games, too late when we get home, kids have school, early start for work the next day, what if it goes into OT. blah, blah, blah.

Maybe we should have a 11 month schedule and try to make everyone happy.

 

[Mayor Bee]

My understanding is that teams give dates to the league and based on that a schedule is made up.

Can't blame the league for teams not being able to have home games because something else is going on.

As for time of games. That's up to the individual teams. I can't see how the league dictates times (other than when NBC dictates times)

I noticed how someone sarcastically mentioned how he thinks the Leafs have more Saturday games, then I discovered that his team, the Preds have more Saturday games than the Leafs.

No matter what, someones not going to be happy. 7PM games, lots of excuses why they aren't good, can't get off work in time, traffic, need time to pick up the kids, blah, blah, blah.
8PM games, too late when we get home, kids have school, early start for work the next day, what if it goes into OT. blah, blah, blah.

Maybe we should have a 11 month schedule and try to make everyone happy.

This has nothing to do with making everyone happy or making someone unhappy. The purpose of the league is to maximize revenue leaguewide, and scheduling is obviously an important component.

There are plenty of variables that go into each individual market's attendance. I hardly think that it's unreasonable to suggest working around those as much as possible.

 

[Kritter471]

In markets like pittsburgh, chicago, detroit, boston, washington, toronto, montreal, vancouver, calgary, edmonton, the games are going to sell out, regardless of its a tuesday or wednesday night game or if its a friday or saturday night game.

Historically untrue for all the bolded markets. Those are selling out right now, but all have struggled to fill the building in the recent or semi-recent past. Heck, even the Canucks have struggled, though not to the extent of the others.

Regardless, scheduling in each market needs to be contingent upon the market factors. Sometimes this means avoiding nights one would traditionally consider strong in some seasons (try to avoid Saturday home games during college football season in Columbus, for instance, or avoid Cowboys games for Stars home games Dallas).

Also, the majority of the teams in the league play in multi-purpose buildings where they are not the only scheduling factor. So some not-prime times are going to be unavoidable for all markets. The Hawks want Friday night just as much as the Thrashers, for instance.

Finally, you're always going to have a give-and-take with TV. TV, particularly network, prefers even start times like 7 p.m. while, at least in Dallas, 7:30 is a much more viable start time given the traffic. They prefer afternoon weekend games while those tend not to draw well in some markets.

I do wish there was a little more emphasis on avoiding conflicts with major college football games because that is a religion in some parts of the country. But given all the complicating issues, I'm not sure if there's much the league can do to alter the schedule so it's more favorable to the weak markets, regardless of which markets are weak at the time.

 

[Gnashville]

Okay, well you want to increase revenues, that's fine. You've pointed out this is the BoH board and in the best interest of business I think the league should be seeking out all methods to increase revenues.

As such, teams that are not supported should not be in their current markets. Right now we're seeing teams giving tickets away for free, or pricing playoff ticket cheap seats as low as $25/ticket (by contrast the Canucks cheapest playoff tickets are starting at around $150/ticket). There are currently several strong markets that are unserved. My suggestion is that we seek to relocate these unsupported teams to these unserved markets. That will definitely increase revenues, and then the NHL will not be forced to continue taking advantage of fans who support their teams.

If the league did as you suggest, how much do you think that the Canucks lower their ticket prices???

 

[y2kcanucks]

If the league did as you suggest, how much do you think that the Canucks lower their ticket prices???

I'm not saying they necessarily lower ticket prices, but there would be even more funds available for other areas of the Canucks operation, and potentially further upgrades to the arena or the concourse around the arena.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I'm not saying they necessarily lower ticket prices, but there would be even more funds available for other areas of the Canucks operation, and potentially further upgrades to the arena or the concourse around the arena.

So you're missing improved toilet seats? How does that constitute the NHL "taking advantage of the fans"?

 

[y2kcanucks]

So you're missing improved toilet seats? How does that constitute the NHL "taking advantage of the fans"?

What happens if these fans all of a sudden turn around and stop going to those games? Are the southern markets strong enough to take advantage of the new start times to make up for these fans from the "stronger" markets who are boycotting the games?

 

[Moo]

Howsabout EVERYBODY gets more Friday and/or weekend games??? No, I'm not kidding. The season covers 27 weekends. That means 81 possible dates, or 83 if you count US and Canadian Thanksgiving Days, although you would run into conflicts with other events, especially NBA teams in the same building. Consider where possible...

• weekend "double-headers", where the visiting team plays on either Friday+Saturday or Saturday+Sunday. Given the possibility of rising oil prices, this could cut down travel expenses somewhat.
• I'm sure that the NHL already tries to schedule games together for nearby cities. E.g. Vancouver on a road swing could play Calgary and Edmonton on consecutive nights. Or Tampa Bay could do Islanders+Rangers+Devils on Friday+Saturday+Sunday.

Sounds like a win-win to me. Comments?

Teams are not allowed to play three days in a row. That issue last came to light last season when the Lightning-Devils game had power failure issues in New Jersey's arena midway through the second period.

Fast forward through all the details, and the best day for Tampa Bay to return to conclude the game was two days later and would have made for three games in three days for both teams. That required approval to do so. This was a very unique situation though, and even then, it wasn't a full three games in three days. It was two days of half-games sandwiched around full games against different teams. To do three full games would be too strenuous.

 

[tarheelhockey]

What happens if these fans all of a sudden turn around and stop going to those games? Are the southern markets strong enough to take advantage of the new start times to make up for these fans from the "stronger" markets who are boycotting the games?

What in the world are you talking about?

 

[y2kcanucks]

What in the world are you talking about?

I just question whether or not the NHL should be in markets where they have to make special concessions in order to HOPEFULLY attract fans, especially when there are other markets that are currently without a team that would be supported.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I just question whether or not the NHL should be in markets where they have to make special concessions in order to HOPEFULLY attract fans, especially when there are other markets that are currently without a team that would be supported.

That has literally nothing to do with what you wrote in your last post. This conversation has become so scattershot I don't even know what we're talking about.

Please choose a topic:

1) The NHL is somehow taking advantage of people because they can't get arena upgrades
2) There could be a boycott that would destroy the southern teams
3) There are cities out there that deserve a team but can't get one
4) The Business of Hockey

 

[Mr Atoz*]

If the schedule existed in a vacuum, it wouldn't bother me a bit. However, each individual teams have their own requests, many teams share their barn with another tenant, and the networks need to be catered to as well. Any or all of these could stand in the way of favourable scheduling for given teams.

Amazing that this is the only post that takes the real world into account.

Other than playoff games the Rangers never play at home on Saturday night - never. The Knicks do. Madison Square Garden is the busiest arena on the planet. You want to see hockey on Saturday night? Well I want to see Paul McCartney on a Saturday night. Not a Tuesday.