Forbes 2012 annual review of NHL
View Single Post
11-29-2012, 10:03 AM
Join Date: Aug 2004
Originally Posted by
so far, i've demonstrated that forbes revenue data, at the very least, adds up. I intend on tackling costs next, which is far more messy, but regardless, i would consider it ignorant to simply dismiss the only information that we as fans have access to.
if you would like to provide a counterargument, please drop the rhetoric. I've seen that every year. Please provide an empirical counterargument. You appear to attempt to provide one, but it is inherently flawed. Every company does not have debt. Many companies either choose to be responsible by funding liabilities through cash calls, or have such a large surplus of funds that taking on debt is counterproductive in terms of taxes. This easily explains the 4 teams that forbes reports as having zero debt.
So please, bother with the rest. Actually, dont just bother, try this time. Try hard. I very much appreciate academic discourse and debate, so dont waste my time with this garbage.
I've audited some big companies in the past. I've never seen a company with zero debt. Never. Just holding companies and then maybe. If its zero, the players should be suspicious. Your comment centres on cash, what about accrual accounting? Anyways, the zero is debt figure is what you would call a red flag.
Anyways, your answer doesnt substantiate the numbers at all and neither does his article. Not explained by Forbes what the exact methodology was used. The big issue is intercompany transactions. What does MLSE (which also owns raptors) charge Bell for broadcasting $ on TSN. Arena costs are similar.
Bottom line, go ahead and rely on Forbes. Stating that its the only thing you got isnt an acceptable supposition.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by DuklaNation