Attacking the Levitt report:
View Single Post
11-03-2004, 04:02 PM
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
just to point something out
Originally Posted by
Interesting read...I couldn't get through it beacuse it's long, but there are some holes in the reprot, such as player costs really aren't 75% of gross revenue, rather 75% of net revenue, which takes out certain costs to arrive at a gross profit, and the player costs include things other than salaries and benefits, such as insurance, travel, and minor league salaries whereas minor league revenues are not included.
There's tons more in there.
The Rangers and Hartford situation is a bit different than most situations between the NHL and AHL.
Most NHL franchises do not own their minor league affiliate, they have developemental agreements in place that state that I will own a franchise in the AHL and you will provide me players for my team. Up until last year (or the year before) there were less AHL teams than NHL teams and there were alot of sharing going on between two NHL franchises in terms of the AHL team they had an agreement with.
So, to my point. Minor League revenues would not be included in this because not every team owns their affiliate. Additionally, the revenues generated by a minor league franchise should in no way shape of form be shared with NHL franchises simply because the NHL team is not the one generating those revenues.
But I haven't read the article and that may be pointed out somewhere in the article.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by pld459666