MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7135607063

Marketing of NHL in 2005-2015

2016· dissertation· cs· W7135607063 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jan Kadeřábek

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Repository (National Repository of Grey Literature) · 2016
Typedissertation
Languagecs
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSports, Gender, and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeagueSalaryCompetitor analysisCompetition (biology)Las vegasClubFootball
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis is focused on marketing of the National Hockey League (NHL) from 2005 to 2015. The NHL, having been founded in 1917, is the oldest and most famous ice hockey competition in the world. The aim of the study is to investigate the role and the impact of marketing and its techniques on the NHL. I start with 2005 because the then season was completely cancelled due to disagreements among players and owners of the clubs. It is considered to be a turning point in the history of the NHL since a salary cap has been introduced and clubs could spent limited amount of money on players. The main attention of the thesis is directed at single marketing activities of the league - television broadcasting, outdoor games, sponsors, All-Star Games, lockouts, the salary cap and revenues. Considerable space is devoted to comparison with the biggest competitors of the NHL on the North American sport market. The findings from the research show that management of the league uses marketing and its tools very extensively. Marketing helps the NHL to fulfil its plans, bring new fans and attract lucrative sponsors. The study concludes with a prediction what the future will bring to the league. An extension of the NHL into new markets in Las Vegas and Quebec is set to happen together with growing revenues.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.195
Threshold uncertainty score0.388

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Repository (National Repository of Grey Literature)Same topicSports, Gender, and SocietyFrench-language works237,207