Edmonton Journal: Why do billionaires keep buying teams that lose money?
View Single Post
11-19-2012, 07:47 PM
A guy with a bass
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Instead of taking his mistake and using it to negate the guys credibility, why don't you guys try applying reason to the facts that we do know.
1) SSE consists of two branches, the Panthers and the AOC.
2) The AOC pulled in $89m in profit over 10 years.
3) Forbes estimates* that the Panthers lost on average $7m per season for the same 10 years, meaning they lost $70m.
4) SSE made a profit of $19m over those 10 years.
Variables: 1.) SSE transferred $98m from AOC to the Panthers over 10 years for what could be any number of a myriad of reasons. 2.) The accuracy of Forbes' numbers. (edit: an more specifically, any potential overlap between what Forbes allocates to the Panthers and the audit recognizes as AOC money)
Given that SSE would not have the rights to operate the arena without operating the Panthers, the ownership makes money from owning the Panthers. Take the factual integrity of the article, which I agree is awful, out of the equation and you still come up with the same conclusion.
*I'm actually the first one to jump on Forbes' numbers, but that's because I believe they miss revenue and overestimate costs. From my point of view, that would make SSE more profitable than these estimates suggest.
Last edited by Tawnos: 11-19-2012 at
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Tawnos