CONSUMPTION BENEFITS OF NATIONAL HOCKEY LEAGUE GAME TRIPS ESTIMATED FROM REVEALED AND STATED PREFERENCE DEMAND DATA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the demand for hockey game trips among metropolitan and nonmetropolitan residents of Alberta, Canada. Using data on both revealed and stated preference game‐trip behavior from a telephone survey conducted throughout Alberta, we estimate the effect of ticket prices, team quality, arena amenities, and capacity on the latent demand for National Hockey League hockey games. We find that lower ticket prices, higher team quality, and additional capacity encourage attendance. In the status quo scenario, consumer surplus per game is $50 for those who had attended hockey games and about 50% less for those who had not attended games. Exploiting the stated preference data, we develop a number of other consumer surplus estimates. We also include travel costs in the estimation of the demand function and estimate the full value of the game trip considering both ticket prices and travel costs. Sold‐out arenas in Calgary and Edmonton generate annual consumption benefits of $40 and $35 million when only ticket prices are used to calculate consumer surplus (i.e., excluding travel costs). Considering the full‐price consumer surplus for the Calgary Flames of $103 per game trip, the annual consumption benefits may be as high as $82 million. (JEL R22, L83, D61)
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".