Lady Stanley
Registered User
- May 26, 2021
- 727
- 538
They literally do the exact same thing in retail/fast food. It's why those small little towns can be so incredibly lucrative.Sports isn't retail. They intentionally keep the number of franchises low for valuation purposes (and maybe even quality purposes).
And they rely on small markets to keep that demand high, because there isn't 32 large markets in the USA who can even support a team.As such, they have a limited number of options and an opportunity cost when they choose one market over another.
And those businesses that fo into the major markets are also the businesses that grow immensely and become national, I.e. major brands.
There's the same number of people in Quebec than Arizona, Arizona isn't a major state.If the NHL was content to be a niche market, then it'd be in QC, Hamilton, Kitchener, Syracuse, Rochester etc
But they want to maximize revenue potential and the way to do that is become a major brand by entering major markets.
You can want to do a lot of things, at some point when the potential you feel you have isn't recognized by other people you need a little humility.
Name me the potential 16 markets for hockey.
Assuming we're talking about some future situation where American hockey culture changes in a novel way and their tv contract was so strong they weren't worried about losing money to weak markets. .
Contingent on a US-Can split and Canada having it's own business model that reflects the needs of each country/i.e. more tv contract orientated with smaller arenas.
Toronto 1,2,3 Hamilton Kitchener, Victoria London, Halifax Vancouver 1&2, Montreal 1&2, Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, QC. You'd have 1 team for roughly every 3 million Canadians(assuming 48 million people in the country)
In the US it'd be San Diego-Houston-Austin-KC-Portland-Atlanta-Cleveland(SLC/whatever)