- Dec 1, 2015
- 1,014
- 483
Many cite the high cost and inaccessibility of hockey as a reason for low participation rates. The general consensus is the sport is cost prohibitive for families that aren't at minimum middle-class. I'm lower middle class, began playing hockey as an adult and haven't felt its unreasonably costly. Equipment certainly isn't cheap, but a patient and attentive shopper can find heavily discounted equipment; drop-in sessions are generally $10-$15USD. When I visit Canada they're generally less expensive.
Obviously I haven't experienced the game at youth level, so I'm ignorant to expenses incurred. Other than equipment and rink time, what makes make hockey cost-prohibitive in comparison to other popular N.A sports?
Obviously I haven't experienced the game at youth level, so I'm ignorant to expenses incurred. Other than equipment and rink time, what makes make hockey cost-prohibitive in comparison to other popular N.A sports?