What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Has UND lost in conference realignment?

Re: Has UND lost in conference realignment?

He's going to the Patrick Kane School of Ditching a Cab Fare. Although at least Kaner paid in coins.
 
Re: Has UND lost in conference realignment?

Biddco said:
He's going to the Patrick Kane School of Ditching a Cab Fare. Although at least Kaner paid in coins.
Click to expand...

Yeah but Kaner probably put those coins in a sack and beat the cabbie over the head with them. I am against heavy sack beating unless you fill the sack with doorknobs.
 
Re: Has UND lost in conference realignment?

Someone told him that he could buy a vowel for his name at Valley Dairy ... they were on sale for $3.99.
 
Re: Has UND lost in conference realignment?

Biddco said:
Indeed.

UND will be fine because they have top notch facilities and history. UMD on the other hand worries me...will they be able to compete in a new conference? That will be determined over the next many decades.
Click to expand...

The fate of the NCHC is questionable. What have UMD and St Cloud gained by going to Kalamazoo and Oxford instead of Bemidji and Mankato? Do the economics work in the long term for those schools? What have North Dakota, Denver and CC gained by leaving the WCHA for a league composed primarily of WCHA teams? To TV viewers outside those markets, how attractive is a CC-Nebraska Omaha or Denver-St Cloud matchup?
 
Re: Has UND lost in conference realignment?

Tipsy McStagger said:
You keep bringing up viewership. Why? What does that translate to?

The average television viewer is worth $.10 per hour to advertisers. (http://fatknowledge.blogspot.com/2006/03/how-much-is-my-tv-advertising-watching.html) The average hockey game is 2.5 hours. That equates to $.25 per viewer per game. It was a big story last year when the Wild drew 132,000 viewers for their season opener against the Blackhawks. That shattered their previous record of around 80,000 viewers. Those are record numbers. Let's assume their average numbers are about half of that, which is 40,000 viewers. So if the Wild average around 40,000 viewers, how many do you think the Gophers average? Maybe half of that if they are lucky? So let's say 20,000 viewers. If each viewer is worth $.25, then the average Gopher game brings in $5,000 in advertising for FSN. I think all of these numbers are generous estimates.

Looking at the website, tickets at the Ralph are $45. If UND sells an average of 11,600 tickets per game at $45 per ticket that is $522,000 in ticket revenue. Tickets for the Gophers are $35 and if they average 10,000 tickets per game their revenue is $350,000. That is a difference of $172,000 per game. Which dwarfs the TV revenue that the Gophers could possibly be bringing in. So please tell me how the Gophers could possibly be bringing in more money than North Dakota, because I don't see any way that is possible looking at the ticket revenue.
Click to expand...

I think your numbers may be a little off, again. One thing to keep in mind is that cable channels create revenue by user fees in addition to advirtising dollar. This is why BTN can give each school $20M per year. Using advirtising alone and your $0.10 per viewer hour advirtising rate (of which I am skeptical) that would mean BTN would have to have more than 270,000 viewers 24/7/265. That wouldn't include any cost of business or profit (Fox owns about 50%).

My guess is that the $0.10 per viewer hour is wrong (I can't open the link) and subscriber fees play a factor.

Never dismiss TV revenue.
 
Last edited:
Re: Has UND lost in conference realignment?

davyd83 said:
The fate of the NCHC is questionable. What have UMD and St Cloud gained by going to Kalamazoo and Oxford instead of Bemidji and Mankato? Do the economics work in the long term for those schools? What have North Dakota, Denver and CC gained by leaving the WCHA for a league composed primarily of WCHA teams? To TV viewers outside those markets, how attractive is a CC-Nebraska Omaha or Denver-St Cloud matchup?
Click to expand...

I never really got the draw of Miami or WMU over MN schools or those of upper MI. And even stated when the league was formed that if Miami didn't hold its level of success, the decision to put them over other schools would be seriously misguided. Frankly, the league almost committed a disaster of the first degree by not including SCSU (a disaster not just in terms of a quality team...but in terms of league fan counts, recruiting and really justified usage of the twin cities for play offs).
 
Re: Has UND lost in conference realignment?

Bertogliat said:
I think your numbers may be a little off, again. One thing to keep in mind is that cable channels create revenue by user fees in addition to advirtising dollar. This is why BTN can give each school $20M per year. Using advirtising alone and your $0.10 per viewer hour advirtising rate (of which I am skeptical) that would mean BTN would have to have more than 270,000 viewers 24/7/265. That wouldn't include any cost of business or profit (Fox owns about 50%).

My guess is that the $0.10 per viewer hour is wrong (I can't open the link) and subscriber fees play a factor.

Never dismiss TV revenue.
Click to expand...
Right, but is FSN going back to Comcast and DirecTV and asking for an increase in user fees based on having the rights to broadcast Gopher hockey? Because if they did, they would be laughed out of the meeting. Not enough people watch college hockey. BTN can give each school $20M per year because of the basketball and football games they show. Everything else is just to fill time.

As far as the advertising rate, that is based on all money spent on TV advertising divided by the number of hours viewers watched TV. From my link:
In 2003, on average Americans watch 1745 hours of TV a year, or if we assume 270 million Americans, 471 billion hours. The TV networks and cable operators sold $33.6 and $14.3 billion in advertising respectively for a total of $47.9 billion.
Click to expand...
You bring up user fees, but do you think FSN is forking over any significant amount of money to the U of M for the broadcast rights to something that maybe 20,000 people are going to watch? I used the advertising alone because that is probably what the broadcast is worth to FSN. They aren't even going to give all of the advertising money to the U, they need to make a profit. Also, they have to pay Doug McLeod and the people working the TV trucks. So I think whatever user fees FSN generates from Gopher hockey probably don't even cover the costs to put on the broadcast.

Even if the rate isn't accurate, and they paid twice the average rate, it still isn't much money compared to the ticket revenue. I will dismiss the TV revenue because there is no evidence that it is a significant amount. Not enough people watch college hockey on TV for it to be very profitable.
 
Re: Has UND lost in conference realignment?

Paging Chuck Schwartz!

Your article stated $2M per school per year. Was that assumed from the LPH tweet or was that eventually confirmed?
 
Re: Has UND lost in conference realignment?

Bertogliat said:
Paging Chuck Schwartz!

Your article stated $2M per school per year. Was that assumed from the LPH tweet or was that eventually confirmed?
Click to expand...

I might be wrong but I believe the number is incorrect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top