Will Bettman ever get a US TV contact that pays like the NFL, the NBA? MLB?

[Jokerit 16]

I agree with you. NHL will get a huge rage of a new tv deal. I hope they will find a partners which are promoting the game national wide in USA.

What are the best options for new partners? Any thoughs?

My opinion is NBC, Fox and some tech company.

 

[Lee Sharpe]

Well 50-60 % NBC, a new partner Fox, ESPN or some other 30 % and 20-10 % tech company!

 

[Stand Witness]

1) Whatever network agrees to a deal with the NHL will most likely end up getting a bargain deal.

2) Half of this is on the players, half of this is on the owners. The league needs to make the players more available by providing mandatory media availability and diversify the media partners of the league.

The players need to cut the hockey culture and start providing some personality. Stop being robots to the media. Show some personality on ice (goal celebrations etc...). As a kid, I can’t remember the actual goal Pat Kane scored against the Kings in OT but I can remember the celly. Same with Matthews when he signalled goal after he scored... or when Matthews and Kane both went back to back with the “can’t hear you”. This applies to other sports too. I can’t remember the average TD but there are a lot of memorable celebrations. Goals generally aren’t very memorable... but a celly can be.

 

[coolboarder]

I believe that the NHL values will go up only if the ref calls the penalties and not game management. I'm sure that a casual hockey fan is watching his team play and sees that there's infraction is being committed and they refused to call any penalty. Also I feel that the Stanley Cup Final should be held in February to maximum the audience seeing that their town/cities is still in winter mode. This is the only way to increase their TV deal. Season should start in late August leading up to February. I know that the rating might suffer with competition to football/baseball. Or the NHL might want to reconsider their format from 82 games season to 60 game season to maximum the revenue as much as possible with TV deal or gate revenues. So many unsold tickets is being wasted spread out of the schedule.

 

[LadyStanley]

To answer the title question: No. I don't expect the NHL to negotiate a multi-BILLION annual deal for TV Rights.

However, I believe that the TOTAL media rights package -- including streaming -- will increase from the (few) hundred million deals currently.

With so many folks cutting the cords, you cannot assume that cable (and satellite) companies will be willing/able to have a bidding war for fewer and fewer eyes. (Now if they have streaming rights, that might mean the price increases.)

 

[Bixby Snyder]

FOX + ESPN for about 1 billion per year.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

FOX + ESPN for about 1 billion per year.

Don't we usually color-code or alternate-letter-CAPS or pseudo-tag sarcasm?

 

[Butch 19]

well the NHL is always gonna struggle with being the only sport league that depends on gate revenue.....

if thats the case, why the NHL decided to expand in the southern US knowing it will never receive the same type of media
exposure compared to the NFL?

the NHL, imho, should've stuck to 21 franchises and put more emphasis on canadian markets instead trying to compete with the NFL, etc...

Well, it took all of 2 posts for you to get to your actual topic: I hate southern hockey. That about covers it?

 

[Three On Zero]

Hockey is a niche sport, it will NEVER draw like the big 3 do

 

[Bixby Snyder]

Hockey is a niche sport, it will NEVER draw like the big 3 do

Every sport at some time was a niche sport. The NFL was not mainstream until the 70s and the NBA in the 80s.

 

[Bixby Snyder]

Don't we usually color-code or alternate-letter-CAPS or pseudo-tag sarcasm?

The current US deal is a steal for NBC. Maybe $1 billion is on the high end but it'll be more than $600 million. While the NHL may not get the viewership numbers that the NBA does it does get a much wealthier audience.

 

[StreetHawk]

The current US deal is a steal for NBC. Maybe $1 billion is on the high end but it'll be more than $600 million. While the NHL may not get the viewership numbers that the NBA does it does get a much wealthier audience.

Right now, the NHL combined with NBC and Rogers gets around $550 million USD per year. Even at $600 mill per from the US deal would put them just under $1 billion in total tv for US and Canada.

NBA gets $2.66 billion per year, which is like $87 million USD per team. That is more than the NHL's salary cap.

 

[93LEAFS]

Every sport at some time was a niche sport. The NFL was not mainstream until the 70s and the NBA in the 80s.

Look at the differences in barriers to entry for those three sports. Soccer was niche compared to Hockey. Football equipment while expensive, is generally re-used by high-school teams and funded through booster programs and local school districts. Something that isn't likely to occur with hockey. Basketball is a very accessible sport.

The question at this point shouldn't be will the NHL catch the NBA or MLB, it's whether the MLS surpasses it.

 

[Hockeyholic]

NHL doesn't deserve a TV deal like the superior NFL.

NFL markets their stars.
Their stars have a say on politics and life issues. Mahomes was trying to get people to vote.

Where was Crosby and MacK? They may be Canadian. But most of their time is in the US.

I was more pumped for week 9 of the NFL season than I was game 6 of the Finals.

NFL is king.

 

[Rodgerwilco]

Simply put... no way!

Hockey just doesn't have the popularity to get the viewership, and I don't believe it ever will. It's a highly gate-kept sport by fans, players, and executives alike.

 

[No Fun Shogun]

Only if one of the bigger three leagues utterly collapses and their next TV contract takes a big hit.

 

[Lt Dan]

Look at the differences in barriers to entry for those three sports. Soccer was niche compared to Hockey. Football equipment while expensive, is generally re-used by high-school teams and funded through booster programs and local school districts. Something that isn't likely to occur with hockey. Basketball is a very accessible sport.

The question at this point shouldn't be will the NHL catch the NBA or MLB, it's whether the MLS surpasses it.

Two things:

1- soccer is one of the most accessible sports in the world
2- Youth recreationally soccer is big in the US

but Professional Soccer is still much more of a niche than the NHL. It is seen largely in the US as a game played by kids. Professional soccer is boring to most the US. The US because of it's population is able to compete in most sports, and US men's soccer is one of the laughing stocks of the world.
Since there aren't nearly as many professional women's league's the US ladies do much much better than the US men in both hockey and soccer.


Look at the revenues. The MLS is not passing the NHL anytime soon. the NHL's revenue is 5x that of the MLS

List of professional sports leagues by revenue - Wikipedia

 

[93LEAFS]

Two things:

1- soccer is one of the most accessible sports in the world
2- Youth recreationally soccer is big in the US

but Professional Soccer is still much more of a niche than the NHL. It is seen largely in the US as a game played by kids. Professional soccer is boring to most the US. The US because of it's population is able to compete in most sports, and US men's soccer is one of the laughing stocks of the world.
Since there aren't nearly as many professional women's league's the US ladies do much much better than the US men in both hockey and soccer.


Look at the revenues. The MLS is not passing the NHL anytime soon. the NHL's revenue is 5x that of the MLS

View attachment 375949
View attachment 375950




List of professional sports leagues by revenue - Wikipedia

And the NHL isn't coming close to the NBA or MLB anytime soon. Which was the main point.

 

[pbgoalie]

Pretty simple
Better ratings in good demographics
Will bring more money

 

[BOS358]

Look at the differences in barriers to entry for those three sports. Soccer was niche compared to Hockey. Football equipment while expensive, is generally re-used by high-school teams and funded through booster programs and local school districts. Something that isn't likely to occur with hockey. Basketball is a very accessible sport.

Irrelevant. Cost of equipment (playing) has nothing to do with the television contract (watching).

The biggest problem with the NHL getting a massive TV contract like the MLB, NFL, and NBA is that the sport is more difficult and costly to broadcast than the other three. If an NHL and MLB game were to bring in the same amount of revenue to a network, the MLB game would be considered the winner because of higher net income. That's all that matters.

The question at this point shouldn't be will the NHL catch the NBA or MLB, it's whether the MLS surpasses it.

This will happen once MLS becomes a destination league instead of a stepping stone to a European league. About the only thing that will cause this to happen is a massive devaluation of the Euro.

 

[No Fun Shogun]

Soccer is seen as a niche in the US because the domestic competition is amateur hour compared to the primo European and South American leagues in existence. MLS is for American and Canadian players that couldn't get a contract in a top-tier league overseas and past their prime international players banking on one last payday.

Meanwhile, if you want to play pro football then the NFL is clearly the best and highest paid league. If you want to play pro baseball then MLB is clearly the best and highest paid league. If you want to play pro basketball the NBA is clearly the best and highest paid league. If you want to play pro hockey, the NHL is clearly the best and highest paid league. These leagues all draw international talent.

Meanwhile, if you're an American soccer phenom, MLS isn't even on your radar unless you're already planning your retirement run. You could probably list off a dozen more competitive and higher paid leagues internationally for players of all levels aside from maybe the singular payday players.

But it's really not that big of an accomplishment for the NHL being bigger than MLS in that regard with that in mind. That'd be like if the Big Ten flexed themselves as one of the big boys because look how small the Missouri Valley Conference is by comparison.

 

[93LEAFS]

Irrelevant. Cost of equipment (playing) has nothing to do with the television contract (watching).

The biggest problem with the NHL getting a massive TV contract like the MLB, NFL, and NBA is that the sport is more difficult and costly to broadcast than the other three. If an NHL and MLB game were to bring in the same amount of revenue to a network, the MLB game would be considered the winner because of higher net income. That's all that matters.



This will happen once MLS becomes a destination league instead of a stepping stone to a European league. About the only thing that will cause this to happen is a massive devaluation of the Euro.

How is Hockey more expensive to broadcast? It doesn't get the TV deal because it can't draw in the viewers. I would think NFL and NBA national broadcasts have significantly more overhead due to the salaries they pay on-air talent. Tony Romo makes over a million dollars per NFL game. I wonder if NBC Sports combined broadcast team makes that over the entire Stanley Cup finals.

As for the cost of play, grassroots initiatives and peoples growing up around the game is likely to get viewers to watch.

 

[BOS358]

How is Hockey more expensive to broadcast?... I would think NFL and NBA national broadcasts have significantly more overhead due to the salaries they pay on-air talent. Tony Romo makes over a million dollars per NFL game. I wonder if NBC Sports combined broadcast team makes that over the entire Stanley Cup finals.

I don't know the specifics, but it has more to do with the equipment and technological setup than announcer salaries. It was explained to me years ago by a former classmate who works in television production, so I'll take his word for it.

As for the cost of play, grassroots initiatives and peoples growing up around the game is likely to get viewers to watch.

It's likely, but it's not imperative. Getting viewers who do not play the sport is a greater concern since there is a larger pool to choose from. Not every football fan is a current former player. Lord knows that MMA participation is a drop in the bucket compared to the people who shell out $100 to watch a UFC broadcast. The NHL, and all other leagues, don't want players as much as they want consumers. That's how they make their money.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

The current US deal is a steal for NBC. Maybe $1 billion is on the high end but it'll be more than $600 million. While the NHL may not get the viewership numbers that the NBA does it does get a much wealthier audience.

That's always been the (oft-alleged) case. That doesn't explain how $200 million goes to "more than $600 million." Hell, you might as well argue that MLS - which got $90 million a year on its current contract that runs through 2022 and which has not gained any appreciable impact with the American public in the last 6+ years - is suddenly going to land $300 million per year or more with [list of reasons that probably don't make any sense].

 

[93LEAFS]

I don't know the specifics, but it has more to do with the equipment and technological setup than announcer salaries. It was explained to me years ago by a former classmate who works in television production, so I'll take his word for it

The thing is though, that those costs are likely insignificant. The reason they don't get the television deals the other sports do is simply because they don't offer the desired product. Hockey simply doesn't draw in the ratings the other Big 4 leagues get.