If Revenue Sharing had been 100% Last Year...
View Single Post
11-18-2012, 04:11 PM
Join Date: May 2008
Originally Posted by
Well I guess I was thinking more about percentages of revenue. Maybe its not $25 million per team, i was just loosey guestamating, but im sure each team would be profitable under 100% revenue sharing.
But your right, whats the motivation to be successful if not for profit?
My answer would be winning. The owners are very successful businessmen outside of hockey already. Perhaps the motivation should be pride in winning and putting together a great team/organization and stanley cup winner. Theres already a lot of parity in the league, so im assuming this is a strong motivating force in trying to succeed as a hockey organization.
Except a well run franchise could be a winning franchise with a break even profit model. Once your expenses are covered the rest is profit. If there's no profit to be shared amongst other teams the owners can reward the fans since they don't earn extra profit anyways.
Besides the largest share of revenue sharing in the NFL comes from the TV contracts rather than gates...home team keeps 60% of gate. This could work in the NHL but since it's a gate driven league rather than TV driven the large franchises would likely fight a 40% donation to the visiting team. You also run into problems as the highest profit teams are in the East (Toronto, Montreal, and NYR). That creates fundamental problems with sharing gate revenue as the Western teams still suffer more than the East.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Brian28