View Single Post
11-16-2012, 08:21 PM
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,811
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
There is every reason to believe that owners will misrepresent their finances. Look at the nasty mess from the leaked MLB financial records. Many teams crying poor when the reality was they were rolling in the dough. It's not just aimed at getting better terms with players, but better leases or having arenas built for them, and so on.

I guess the best measure in the absence of our own ability to get that type of data is franchise sales. When a team is clearing hemorrhaging money, no one will buy it unless they can find terms that will help them make a go of it. Phoenix is not worth the current asking price. Someone has to throw money into it to make up the difference. Several teams have seen their franchise values deteriorate. On the other hand, Montreal and Toronto were also recently sold, and Katz paid more for the Oilers than Vinik did for Tampa or the St Louis price. We can then infer that teams that seem to have quick sales are not losing money, and especially if the sale price is higher than the last one or as compared to similar teams.
That is not at all an accurate way to judge profits and losses. So few teams are bought and sold (and some of them are sold as part of a bigger package like Toronto), and so many factors aside from hockey revenue are involved. How quickly a team sells can have just as much to do with the location, the individual and the market landscape as it does the actual team.

The information we do have is enough to form some sort of range of profits and struggling teams, which no matter what is negative for the league.

You yourself just said there are teams that are not worth it and franchises had their values deteriorate. That is a problem.

Whydidijoin* is offline   Reply With Quote