made this for a school project, about a approach to expansion, would like to hear your thoughts on it?


made this for a school project, about a approach to expansion, would like to hear your thoughts on it?

9 comments
  1. so my teacher has never watched hockey so his feedback wasn’t great… hoping you can share your thoughts on it?

  2. There simply isn’t enough money and corporate support to land all the those Canadian cities. Quebec, maybe. Windsor…long shot. Highly doubt the others.

    Keep in mind the price to start a franchise is in the billions.

    Atlanta I can see. Arizona again probably. Indianapolis? Interesting. Not sure about any of the others. The biggest slam dunk was missing: Houston.

  3. As a school report, it was great. A few grammatical errors, and overuse of “it makes sense” but otherwise very nice. Great graphics, nice presentation.

    As an actual argument for expansion, you’re missing the point of expansion. The point is to grow viewership so they can charge more for TV rights, so the expansion team has to generate more revenue than it takes from the existing teams to increase all existing teams’ bottom line. This is why you will never see a team in Quebec. The NHL already has those viewers, giving them a team just dilutes the current earnings, it doesn’t increase them. Next, to fill the arena, you need corporattions to purchase season tickets. The cost of tickets is out of reach for most families now and aside from the nose-bleed seats, all the seats are owned by season ticket holders, mostly corporations. Small markets like the atlantic provinces don’t have enough rich companies willing to buy season tickets, and they already watch hockey. The only place that makes sense is in the US north west. North of colorado and between Seatle and Minnesota is where the next team will be; if there is a city big enough to support a team.

  4. I’ve seen (and produced!) *far* worse presentations in a corporate environment. I think you did a good job.

    I question some of your teams- like smaller Canadian Cities, a second Bay Area team, no team in Houston… but for a school project, I think you did well!

  5. Nice school presentation. I give it 98 because there were some misspelled words and typographical errors in the Stanley Cup part. LOL!!! Nothing that can’t be cleaned up. BUT… my personal opinion I don’t think Atlanta and Arizona should ever get an NHL team ever again. Atlanta? Three tries? No way. And Arizona? I don’t think I’d want to chance it out there again. But what do I know. GOOD JOB!!!

  6. Quebec City; the problems with it pervade throughout Canada but it’s most noteworthy for being French. That, is not a characteristic that players like and it leaves a limited fanbase.

    New Orleans: a declining city in population with low growth potential. Really don’t see the viability of an NHL team down there even if it would be fun. Maybe a few preseason games at Smoothie King.

    Atlanta: good option despite the past.

    Portland: ehhhh decent option but idk, Portland the city has had some problems in recent years.

    St. John’s: too small.

    Phoenix: yeah but maybe save that for the next wave.

    Windsor: ehhhhh it’s already pretty well covered by the wings.

    San Diego: 3 teams already in California and 2 in SoCal: don’t know if San Diego has a place.

    Halifax: too small

    Saskatoon: too small

    Indianapolis: interesting. I’d be interested in seeing a team there.

    San Francisco: already represented by San Jose

    Overall, not a bad presentation but I would’ve looked at some other markets. Kansas City, Birmingham Alabama, Cincinnati, Houston, Hamilton, and so on.

  7. Why would the NHL ever go to Windsor when Detroit has a (very popular) team? London or Hamilton MAYBE (still unlikely), but Windsor just has no chance

Leave a Reply