CWHL to discontinue operations

[soulchoice]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

as of end of august 2018, the average league attendance to WNBA games was 6,731: the trend line has been pointing down since the league's inception



the CWHL was 617... and that's with Montreal propping up the 3 other teams with their attendance of 1567, with calgary second at 480, Toronto 358 and Worcester with only 83.

the NHL is a business like any other business... investing in it would have to mean some quantifiable returns...

Keep in mind, it’s clear if it wasn’t for the social justice PR nightmare the NBA would have pulled out ages ago. Especially with the players there wanting a higher salary as well.

Not only that, the average worth of an NBA team is 1.9 billion vs 630 million for an NHL club. Notwithstanding the NBA annual revenues are more than double of the NHl. Hence a loss is easier to take for that league.

Ultimately it’s a business, sports.

[BigFlameDog]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Not to sound crass but I do think there is a sense of entitlement too along the lines of "If men can make a living doing this we should be able to". I fully support them making a living doing this... As long as there are people willing to pay to watch. I know the WNBA is subsidized by the NBA but they still average 7,716 in attendance.

Yeah, no that's not it...these girls are pioneers and trying to make it work. No entitlement. They know what they are up against...they love the game. Girls from all over the world didn't come play in Calgary for the money.

[Matt Reeeeead]

Maybe what they should replace the league with "weekend tournaments" in each of the cities. So if there are 6 teams in the league, they simply play 6 weekends of the year, and don't over expose the market.

I would be more likely to buy a one weekend tournament pass than I would be to support a season ticket and build it into my regular routine. Treat as more of a once a year novelty item than a sustainable league.

[BigFlameDog]

Originally Posted by RyZ

What kind of financial agreement did CSEC have with the Inferno? Did CSEC pay for travel? Equipment? There was already NHL involvement with a number of CWHL teams being owned by NHL teams (CGY, MTL, TOR and maybe BOS?).

For the CWHL the NHL teams made a one time contribution prior to year one. There has been no other significant contributions. They were budget teams that raised money to travel and pay the players. Staff were volunteers paid for expenses from what I understand.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by soulchoice

Keep in mind, it’s clear if it wasn’t for the social justice PR nightmare the NBA would have pulled out ages ago. Especially with the players there wanting a higher salary as well.

Not only that, the average worth of an NBA team is 1.9 billion vs 630 million for an NHL club. Notwithstanding the NBA annual revenues are more than double of the NHl. Hence a loss is easier to take for that league.

Ultimately it’s a business, sports.

i'm all for an equitable split...

in the WNBA for example, the primary cause of an impending labor dispute is in the inequity of revenue sharing between it and the NBA, where the former splits 25% of the revenue and the NBA shares half the income with the players.

you would need to fully and completely open the books to see what the WNBA is actually making to the players... something the NBA says it has done, and the players say they have not

Some of the operating costs are sunk; things like arena rental, facility staff, hotel etc will have a minimum cost regards of the profitability of the league (though that quality can obviously go up based on financial success).

the NBA should split the profits 50/50... and if they can't do that, they should be able to substantiate that with open books to all the financial records.

the CWHL or any women's hockey league needs to be driven by viewer interest, both at the gate and through broadcast ratings.... if they can be a viable league (ie breakeven) then i think the equation works.

Money losing teams or leagues do not last...regardless of gender.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

as of end of august 2018, the average league attendance to WNBA games was 6,731: the trend line has been pointing down since the league's inception



the CWHL was 617... and that's with Montreal propping up the 3 other teams with their attendance of 1567, with calgary second at 480, Toronto 358 and Worcester with only 83.

the NHL is a business like any other business... investing in it would have to mean some quantifiable returns...

This brings to my mind questions about the viability of women professional sports more generally. Yes, there are some sporting events featuring women that are successful (such as in tennis, skiing, and athletics) and most recently women have broken through in MMA and in the WWE, but how much does this has to do with the structure of individual sporting competition? How much is it. tied to the international governing bodies which oversee them, like ATP, IAAF, FIS, etc.? I think it is fairly obvious that this success does not translate into other entertainment products like in the NHL, the NBA, and the NFL. Is there a way around this? Is there a reason women competing professionally in individual sports are more commercially successful than those in team sports?

[soulchoice]

Originally Posted by BigFlameDog

Yeah, no that's not it...these girls are pioneers and trying to make it work. No entitlement. They know what they are up against...they love the game. Girls from all over the world didn't come play in Calgary for the money.

Good for them to chase their dream. Not many do that. But when the business model doesn’t make sense and is not profitable for the owners and the salaries are not high enough to make a living. Then it’s probably time to find a new career. Not to sound harsh but it’s reality unfortunately.

Many of us played/loved a game, but aren’t able to make a living out of it. The game can still be played but just not full time or as the go o primary job.

Pioneers or not, business is business. Sports economics is cut throat, no different than the music or movie business.

If they can present a business model that makes logical sense(not emotional) and an owner is willing to risk or take a chance then they have hope. However as you stated they know what they are up against. Seems to me some investors did take a chance already and it was deemed not viable, numbers don’t lie. That is a huge hurdle now.

[Enoch Root]

We all want to see women's hockey in the Olympics. And we want (and expect) Canada to dominate.

So here's the thing: a women's pro league is good for the game. But it probably isn't economically viable on its own. That means it needs support.

And who are the benefactors of its success?

1) fans of the Olympics and the game
2) the NHL, because a women's league likely increases interest from female fans

So stop with the 'it needs to be self-sustaining' argument - because it isn't. Ask yourself (you as a fan of the game, as well as all of the stewards of the game, including the NHL) is women's hockey a good thing?

If the answer to that is yes (and IMO, it most definitely is), then support it and help find a way to make it work.

[Jason14h]

Can we give them Neil’s salary and let him run the league?

[BigFlameDog]

Originally Posted by soulchoice

Good for them to chase their dream. Not many do that. But when the business model doesn’t make sense and is not profitable for the owners and the salaries are not high enough to make a living. Then it’s probably time to find a new career. Not to sound harsh but it’s reality unfortunately.

Many of us played/loved a game, but aren’t able to make a living out of it. The game can still be played but just not full time or as the go o primary job.

Pioneers or not, business is business. Sports economics is cut throat, no different than the music or movie business.

If they can present a business model that makes logical sense(not emotional) and an owner is willing to risk or take a chance then they have hope. However as you stated they know what they are up against. Seems to me some investors did take a chance already and it was deemed not viable, numbers don’t lie. That is a huge hurdle now.

Or they could try something different to hopefully build the business, spur change. Make a last hurrah? Maybe it won't work but they shouldn't just grab their puck and go home without trying. Don't think its emotional, they are trying to change it up and that's a smart move.

The NHL will step in if there are no leagues running, this NWHL league is holding on by it's finger tips and trying to hold out for a buy out by the NHL. The players are trying to nudge it over the cliff.

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

This brings to my mind questions about the viability of women professional sports more generally. Yes, there are some sporting events featuring women that are successful (such as in tennis, skiing, and athletics) and most recently women have broken through in MMA and in the WWE, but how much does this has to do with the structure of individual sporting competition? How much is it. tied to the international governing bodies which oversee them, like ATP, IAAF, FIS, etc.? I think it is fairly obvious that this success does not translate into other entertainment products like in the NHL, the NBA, and the NFL. Is there a way around this? Is there a reason women competing professionally in individual sports are more commercially successful than those in team sports?

let's be honest.
for female sports a lot of the reason for success is the attractiveness of the athlete.
can't enjoy the female form when they have a full cage and hockey gear.

they have to succeed only by the quality of the game, most other female sports don't have that disadvantage. even the WNBA.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

We all want to see women's hockey in the Olympics. And we want (and expect) Canada to dominate.

So here's the thing: a women's pro league is good for the game. But it probably isn't economically viable on its own. That means it needs support.

And who are the benefactors of its success?

1) fans of the Olympics and the game
2) the NHL, because a women's league likely increases interest from female fans

So stop with the 'it needs to be self-sustaining' argument - because it isn't. Ask yourself (you as a fan of the game, as well as all of the stewards of the game, including the NHL) is women's hockey a good thing?

If the answer to that is yes (and IMO, it most definitely is), then support it and help find a way to make it work.

Sorry. I'm going to have to disagree with you.

If it needs to be subsidized simply to exist then it isnt going to work.

Its the same reason the NHL told the Olympics to go pound sand, because they're not going to pay for someone else's toys and the prospect of 'growing the game' be it in China, overseas or anywhere else isnt outstripping the cost of the subsidy.

The NHL is a small-time league in the world of professional sports. They cant be subsidizing another league.

Would paying for women's hockey generate significant revenue relative to its costs? Ever? It seems like a long shot.

And I dont want to demean or dismiss women's hockey, but if they want the same rights and pay as men then they're going to have to come up with a way to sell the same amount of tickets and generate the same amount of revenue.

[Matata]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

let's be honest.
for female sports a lot of the reason for success is the attractiveness of the athlete.
can't enjoy the female form when they have a full cage and hockey gear.

they have to succeed only by the quality of the game, most other female sports don't have that disadvantage. even the WNBA.

This seems to be an unfortunate truth, the highest paying female sport is Tennis, then MMA, both allow ample viewing of the female form. I don't even know what would be 3rd most lucrative female sport (figure skating?). There's an Indian badminton player making millions, but that's nearly all endorsements. Danika Patrik is also having a very fruitful career, but I haven't heard of any other ladies in auto racing:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbad.../#733cf0a3405f


E: I just realized Pro-Wrestling might be 2nd most lucrative field for female athletes, but their total earnings aren't disclosed.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Does this action really move the needle forward?

I think it may set back the sport.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Matata

This seems to be an unfortunate truth, the highest paying female sport is Tennis, then MMA, both allow ample viewing of the female form. I don't even know what would be 3rd most lucrative female sport (figure skating?). There's an Indian badminton player making millions, but that's nearly all endorsements. Danika Patrik is also having a very fruitful career, but I haven't heard of any other ladies in auto racing:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbad.../#733cf0a3405f


E: I just realized Pro-Wrestling might be 2nd most lucrative field for female athletes, but their total earnings aren't disclosed.

What about volleyball?

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Locke

Sorry. I'm going to have to disagree with you.

If it needs to be subsidized simply to exist then it isnt going to work.

Its the same reason the NHL told the Olympics to go pound sand, because they're not going to pay for someone else's toys and the prospect of 'growing the game' be it in China, overseas or anywhere else isnt outstripping the cost of the subsidy.

The NHL is a small-time league in the world of professional sports. They cant be subsidizing another league.

Would paying for women's hockey generate significant revenue relative to its costs? Ever? It seems like a long shot.

And I dont want to demean or dismiss women's hockey, but if they want the same rights and pay as men then they're going to have to come up with a way to sell the same amount of tickets and generate the same amount of revenue.

There are lots of things that need to be subsidized, but are still worthwhile and beneficial.

The NHL may be small, relative to other pro sports leagues, but it is a $4B industry. Supporting women's hockey would probably cost a few million max. It is not, in any way, cost prohibitive. And would (presumably) build the fanbase.

They are not asking for anything even remotely close to the same rights and pay as the men.

[Matata]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

What about volleyball?

Looks like they are doing pretty good, top earner @ almost $2M/yr


https://www.sportseon.com/volleyball...yball-players/

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

There are lots of things that need to be subsidized, but are still worthwhile and beneficial.

The NHL may be small, relative to other pro sports leagues, but it is a $4B industry. Supporting women's hockey would probably cost a few million max. It is not, in any way, cost prohibitive. And would (presumably) build the fanbase.

They are not asking for anything even remotely close to the same rights and pay as the men.

start with say 1M per year from each team for 10 years. with full access to the NHL marketing arm, and some Rogers airtime.
even have the amount contributed decrease by 10% each year with anticipation of generating positive revenue.

I can picture one of the WNHL games being on Saturday as part of hockey day in Canada, for example.

maybe have a deal where every female registered in hockey gets a free season ticket with the purchase of an adult season ticket.

I believe women's hockey does deserve NHL support.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

There are lots of things that need to be subsidized, but are still worthwhile and beneficial.

The NHL may be small, relative to other pro sports leagues, but it is a $4B industry. Supporting women's hockey would probably cost a few million max. It is not, in any way, cost prohibitive. And would (presumably) build the fanbase.

They are not asking for anything even remotely close to the same rights and pay as the men.

The WNBA actions though don't auger well for the NHL having a women's league. They NHL probably prefers paying a fixed subsidy every year, versus being on the hook for undefined (and therefore unlimited) operating losses. It also prevent the pay inequity piece from being their problem, because they don't own the league.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Locke

And thus far my Museum of Antique Accounting Curios has yet to hit paydirt requiring me to continue working.

You need one of those calculators that prints the calculations on a roll of receipt type paper. Then they'll be lining up.