Well, lets face facts.  We are rabid fans of the greatest team sport played, but the rest of the country isn't.  Pro hockey has some national following (even though college hockey is sooooooo much better than the pro game), but even they are never going to compete with baseball, football, squeakball, etc., in terms of fan base and advertising revenue generation.  I'm just so happy we get the regional and final four on TV.  Maybe if we could elect an ex-hockey player President who would fill out his or her brackets for the Icy Sixteen on TV.........

Tom Rowe 

-----Original Message-----
From: - Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Hambone
Sent: Monday, March 29, 2010 11:50 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Advertising and Hockey

In a quick look today at the box score of the UM-MU game in FtWayne, I see attendance below that of the Goggin area capacity despite both teams being relatively close...  Seems advertising works best when there are large numbers in a narrow target audience.  Seems D1 college hockey is lacking in both.  Or maybe it is a goaltender attitude that means we don't easily let these ads cross into our nets. :>)

-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Fitta <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Monday, March 29, 2010 11:47 AM
Subject: Re: Advertising and Hockey


>The only money ESPN makes on those ads is if people actually buy the 
>products!  With the exception of the Paul Michael Glaser debt ad, not 
>sure how that one works.
>
>The reality is there were no paid sponsors for the ads, which is 
>disappointing on two fronts.  First that no one is seeking us out, and 
>secondly that ESPNU expended no effort to sell any of these locally.  I 
>am sure if they had gone through the list of supporters for each of the 
>teams that they could have made a few dollars with local advertisers, 
>but they
are
>content to drop tomatoes, cat scratchers and debt consolidators.  Easy 
>for them on a production value.  Would think with this audience we 
>would have had Viagra (so we can be thankful we did not get that) gold 
>investments and rosetta stone language videos (learn to speak French Canadian 'eh).
>
>What is most disappointing is that not a single hockey advertiser 
>thought
we
>were worthy prospects!  Being in the advertising business I know how 
>tough things are, but I am confident I could have sold a few ads!
>
>Bob Fitta
>U. Maine '83
>
>
>On 3/29/10 10:50 AM, "Hampton, Nathan E." <[log in to unmask]>
>wrote:
>
>> About the TV ads. They cast a VERY sad shadow on college hockey, 
>> because advertisers pay to have their ads shown on TV, and the amount 
>> they pay is based upon the viewing audience. The set of TV ads during 
>> the regionals
was at
>> best the late-night (after midnight!) type of ads - the ones that 
>> show up
just
>> before the national anthem and test pattern. No one better (liquid 
>> bath
soap
>> for men, strong and absorbent paper towels, etc.) cared about us. We 
>> are
small
>> fish in a big pond. So we either better stick together or be very feisty.
In
>> fact, I am thinking of buying three cat claw scratchers and hope you 
>> all
do
>> the same thing so that the advertising industry think we are very
important
>> (high Q-rating or whatever it is advertisers want). I just hope ESPN 
>> made enough money this year to continue picking up all the regional 
>> games. It
was
>> nice to have all the games on one channel.
>>
>> Nathan
>>
>>
>> On 3/29/10 9:27 AM, "Moller Edward N" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> Paul Michael Glaser (a Newton native) hasn't aged a day since Starsky 
>> and Hutch.  I'm just glad that I'm not one of the millions of 
>> Americans who
owe
>> tens of thousands of dollars to the IRS.  If you don't believe me, 
>> just perform a background check.  You scratch my back I'll scratch yours.