Report: NHL Targeting $1 Billion In Additional Revenue

According to a SportsBusiness Journal report, the NHL is targeting $1 billion in additional revenues over the next three seasons. The report by SBJ, available here($), was broken down by NBC’s ProHockeyTalk on Tuesday.

The plan includes strategic increases in league-wide branding, including a documentary in the style of HBO’s 24/7 series that would run through the outdoor games and into the Olympics. SBJ reports that the NHL expects league-generated revenue to grow to “nearly 20 percent of league-wide hockey-related revenue.” As ProHockeyTalk notes, league-generated revenue made up only 7 percent of league-wide hockey-related revenue for the 2005-06 season.

The SBJ report also brings the idea of the World Cup back into the discussion. The league and players haven’t committed to the Olympics past 2014, and an international tournament with more NHL control might be in the cards moving forward.

12 thoughts on “Report: NHL Targeting $1 Billion In Additional Revenue

  • September 10, 2013 at 3:39 pm

    I just hope the hawks don’t do that 24/7 show. Seems like any team that does that is doomed for mediocrity. Blackhawks TV is fine.

  • September 10, 2013 at 4:15 pm

    Wow! No wonder Stan isn’t worried about the salary cap.

    Doing a little quick math … the players get 50% of HRR, so the $1B in new revenue would be $500M for the players, divided by the 30 teams would be $16.6M. Add that $16.6 M to the 2013/14 salary cap of $64.4M and you get a salary cap of $81M for the 2016/17 season … and that doesn’t include HRR increases from non-league wide HRR that would have happened regardless of these new sources of revenue.

    Now, things like depressions and recessions and other things can impact the best laid plans, but if there are no financial earthquakes coming our way, it looks to me like the salary cap will grow fast enough to keep the band together for the foreseeable future. And ain’t that a nice thought.

  • September 10, 2013 at 5:55 pm

    ER- w/ that projection… Hammer and Bickell might feel like chumps in 2-3 yrs.
    IMO- Crow’s contract – while affordable- still to long!

  • September 10, 2013 at 10:47 pm

    ER – The article stated that the projected $1B additional revenue is over a 3 year period (my understanding of the article). I don’t think it should read as $1B additional revenue ANNUALLY. The projected additional salary cap for each team is a bit over $5.5M annually (a bit shy of CC’s future cap hit?) based on my reading of the article.

    Agree with Wall on length of CC’s contract. Four years (on top of this year’s contract) would have been nicer to see. We are looking at CC signed for the next 7 seasons, including the upcoming 2013-14 season. Would like to see contracts structured with additional club option in out year of deal, with club ability to buy-out (similar to baseball). CBA probably does not allow such contracts.

  • September 11, 2013 at 12:20 am

    Boy Named Sioux – upon further review, you’re absolutely correct, I stand corrected. The $16.6M would be spread over three years. Thanks for catching that.

    However, the growth rate of HRR over the past few years projects out to raise the cap substantially over the next few years and should now have another ~$5.5M per year. So, while I overstated the effect of this new revenue, it is still a good sized hunk of dough that will help the Hawks keep the core together for the next bunch of years.

  • September 11, 2013 at 7:15 am

    The league needs these new revenues badly. There are too many teams that struggle to spend the ridiculously low cap. In baseball and basketball, mid tier players make $6-12MM.

    The salary cap era has created much of the parity the league wanted. To keep the parity and to keep the players from leaving the NHL the Cap is going to have to go up significantly. Money will have to be delegated to smaller market teams in order to keep up.

    Although I don’t think many Canadian or US born players would make the move to other leagues, European and Eastern block country players would. Players with attitudes like Hammer’s are hard to come by. No league is as strong as the NHL at this point. Hopefully, the league and owners will keep it that way.

  • September 11, 2013 at 8:49 am

    Good points Mike. I think the health of the NHL, while mostly stable would be improved if the the small market/southern teams become a little viable.

  • September 11, 2013 at 2:49 pm

    Its funny that you call out the Southern team Peter, because actually the Florida teams had a nice attendance number this year. In raw HOME attendance numbers, Tampa was acutally top 10 (now how much of that is people taking a nice little hockey Vacation to Florida is debatable, but the point being is that the number is high). The Panthers are lower (down in the 20s) but not the worst.

    Edmonton and Winnepeg are both in the bottom 7 in attendance but that is due to small stadiums that hold less people. The problem teams just by attendance #’s are Columbus, Phoenix, NYI, Anaheim and Colorado. Each had less than a 93% stadium capacity. (St. Louis was also under 93% capacity but they play in a larger arena so their raw numbers are ok. )

    This also also during seasons where Anaheim and Columbus rolled out very good teams that should have created buzz in their respective markets. For those wanting to give a pass for the short season, these 5 were also near the bottom for the 2011-2012 and 2010-2011 seasons.

    Just thought it was worth noting.

  • September 12, 2013 at 8:12 am

    Tim G, I don’t think home attendance is a problem….except for maybe a few teams. It is the lack of following outside many team’s respective cities. Chicago – Boston makes for a series watched by many hockey fans around the country. A Phoenix – Tampa Bay SC would be a disaster for the NHL. The small market teams need additional support to be competitive. That support has to come from revenues generated by big market games.

  • September 12, 2013 at 9:18 am

    Yeah, what Mike said.

    I should use numbers more to support my argument, but I was in South Carolina during the Stanley Cup this year and no one cared. They had a Stanley Cup Champion less than 4 hours from them within the past 10 years. The following is a big thing, because that can generate more lucrative TV contracts which funnels back to the team and league. I do not know the TV contract numbers for the hurricanes, but I do know there isn’t a team in Atlanta now (for the 2nd time) because no one gave a damn.

  • September 12, 2013 at 10:45 am

    Peter, Being in southeastern Virginia, we get CSN out of DC on regular cable so Caps games are televised here. We are also 3 hours from Raleigh. To your point, there is a 40+ TV sports bar close by and they have the hockey channels!!…..BUT there is never a hockey game on. We have to ask. They will show college bowling before hockey. Its too bad and an never ending uphill battle to attract fans.

    On a brighter note I will see the 13-14 Hawks in Raleigh Oct 15…..can’t wait.

  • September 17, 2013 at 7:20 am

    Wow, take a look at the photos from the Panther’s Pre-Season home opener. And the league wants to expand???? I think it is time for the league to use that extra revenue to move a few teams……….north.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *