View Single Post
11-03-2004, 04:02 PM
Registered User
pld459666's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 15,242
vCash: 500
just to point something out

Originally Posted by Fletch

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.

pld459666 is offline