So what I'm and just saying is that if they would put franchises in better locations that would make more revenues, and even if the canada economy was slumping it wouldn't matter as much.
Sure it would. Winnipeg and Quebec are looked at as "better locations," but neither of them were viable financially, and even with the salary cap I doubt that's changed enough.
The thing that gets ignored with teams like Florida, Phoenix, and Atlanta is that they all have something in common - they've all been poorly run, perennially bad teams. Florida hasn't made the playoffs in what, ten years? Phoenix has been bad for most of the decade. Atlanta's had one good season. I seem to remember the Panthers and Coyotes having good attendance when they were successful teams. We all know in Pittsburgh that constant losing will drive fans away. Atlanta's attendance was on the upswing as they got better and now it's plummeted as the team has plummeted. I'd like to see what those markets could do with a team that's good for a few years. Phoenix is at least on that path. I'd be more concerned about a team like Nashville that wasn't drawing even when they were at the top of the league and still struggled to do anything as the team's future is in question.
Not pointing any fingers specifically because I don't know where people in this thread stand, but what gets me the most is when people complain about the NHL not being in "hockey cities" but then simultaneously complain about the league not getting exposure in the US. You can't have it both ways. It's either going to be a niche sport or they're going to try to expand to unconventional locations. Phoenix, Atlanta, and Miami are huge markets. A lot of southern expansion HAS been successful. If the NHL is ever going to be big nationally in the US, it has to get rooted into the big southern markets.