I could see Austin as a good play instead of Houston. You'd be bringing in fans who might not be NHL fans, but jump on because they're the only Big Four team that's in Austin instead of saturated marketplace of Houston.
As for the TV market thing, it's really not that big of a deal, because Austin's TV market would include Houston (and San Antonio). Dallas ownership would be against it, obviously.
The thing with TV markets is that EVERY MARKET gets someone was their "home team" the way the NHL carves up rights. It's just a matter of making more fans interested in Austin/Houston/San Antonio if they had their own team vs watching Dallas' team.
This can’t be good for AUstin MLS bid lol...
Austin's MLS bid is essentially a done deal... the Columbus Crew's owner was going to move to Austin, but a group of fans blocked it by citing the "Art Modell Rule" that the state put in place after the Cleveland Browns moved (Every team in a publicly financed facility cannot move out of the facility unless there are no offers to buy the team and retain it in the facility).
The current Cleveland Browns ownership is going to step up and invest in saving the Crew, so the Crew owner and MLS are striking a deal where Austin gets a team and the Crew keeps a team. It might be a "paper trade" of "who's the new club and who's the existing club" (but that's been done before in numerous sports, like the Boston Celtics owner wanted to move to San Diego and the Buffalo Braves owner said he'd take the Boston market if it's vacated. So the Celtics owner took the Braves to San Diego (they're now the Clippers) and the Buffalo owner took over the Celtics).