HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

2009 Forbes NHL Team Valuations

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-11-2009, 05:55 PM
  #1
Fire Julien
Registered User
 
Fire Julien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Bergen
Country: Norway
Posts: 18,027
vCash: 500
2009 Forbes NHL Team Valuations

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2009/31/...ions_Rank.html

Leafs are 1st by a huge margin once again.


Mod Edit: link to the article discussing this year's values: http://www.forbes.com/2009/11/11/nhl...-nhl_land.html


Last edited by Fugu: 11-12-2009 at 05:43 AM. Reason: link
Fire Julien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2009, 06:06 PM
  #2
Jonathan Iilahti*
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,783
vCash: 500
Chicago and Pittsburgh's fair weather fans make quite a difference.

Jonathan Iilahti* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2009, 06:26 PM
  #3
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,833
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Interesting to see how Phoenix, Atlanta, New York Islanders, Nashville, and Florida are all at the bottom.

The net losses for half the league is alarming but I think that can be attributed to the economic conditions which will not be prevalent year after year. Although I will point out that Columbus, Florida and Phoenix suffered astronomically high losses.

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2009, 06:50 PM
  #4
danishh
Dat Stache
 
danishh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: mtl/ott/somewhere
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,657
vCash: 500
any explanation for how well the hawks did over the past year? reorganization?

also, why is dallas' debt load still so high 8 years after building the new arena?


Last edited by danishh: 11-11-2009 at 06:58 PM.
danishh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2009, 07:09 PM
  #5
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Can really see the effect of the cap in those numbers - get to a certain revenue level and incremental dollars start falling right to the bottom line.

The Kings also seem to be a better (fiscally) run team than I had expected, although that may just be a function of my own biases.

  Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2009, 07:17 PM
  #6
MayDay
Registered User
 
MayDay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Mount Kisco, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,633
vCash: 500
I don't understand how the Forbes list always shows the Sabres losing large amounts of money (-$5.2 million in operating income), which is more or less in direct contrast to what we have heard from team ownership and management.

I'm deeply suspicious of Forbes' data because I'd really like to know where they get their numbers from. NHL teams don't open their books. So why does Forbes think they know how much money teams are making or losing?

MayDay is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2009, 07:17 PM
  #7
Kevin Malone
Registered User
 
Kevin Malone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,343
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danishh View Post
any explanation for how well the hawks did over the past year? reorganization?

also, why is dallas' debt load still so high 8 years after building the new arena?
I believe I remember reading somewhere that Hicks is hemoraging money on other business ventures. My guess is he has probably borrowed against the Stars to help pay for that. I hope someone can clarify this?

Kevin Malone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2009, 07:20 PM
  #8
IslesDude
 
IslesDude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 430
vCash: 500
Atlanta is hardly losing any money compared to the other teams near the bottom. What is up with that?

IslesDude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2009, 08:38 PM
  #9
trueblue9441
Registered User
 
trueblue9441's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bronx, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 3,480
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to trueblue9441
Quote:
Originally Posted by IslesDude View Post
Atlanta is hardly losing any money compared to the other teams near the bottom. What is up with that?
they do have some pretty good sponsorship deals from what ive heard... coca cola, home depot, etc

trueblue9441 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2009, 09:30 PM
  #10
TaketheCannoli
RIP
 
TaketheCannoli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 8,577
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pauser View Post
Interesting to see how Phoenix, Atlanta, New York Islanders, Nashville, and Florida are all at the bottom.

The net losses for half the league is alarming but I think that can be attributed to the economic conditions which will not be prevalent year after year. Although I will point out that Columbus, Florida and Phoenix suffered astronomically high losses.
Columbus's losses are attributable to their arena. They pay essentially $8 million to rent the building and the lease requires they cover costs of non-hockey events, another $4 to $5 million.

TaketheCannoli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2009, 09:44 PM
  #11
btn
Gone Hollywood
 
btn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: ATL
Country: United States
Posts: 15,674
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by trueblue9441 View Post
they do have some pretty good sponsorship deals from what ive heard... coca cola, home depot, etc
They own the team outright, so no loan/debt payments to make. They also own the management rights to the arena.

btn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2009, 09:56 PM
  #12
Melrose Munch
Registered User
 
Melrose Munch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,340
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by btn View Post
They own the team outright, so no loan/debt payments to make. They also own the management rights to the arena.
I'll say it before and I'll say it again. They should be making TO and New York money with all the money they get corporate stuff.

Melrose Munch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2009, 10:06 PM
  #13
c hand 29*
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 767
vCash: 500
leafs are only first cuz their tickets are so damn expensive, their revenue is huge. its hard to go to one of their games

c hand 29* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2009, 10:23 PM
  #14
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,530
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IslesDude View Post
Atlanta is hardly losing any money compared to the other teams near the bottom. What is up with that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by trueblue9441 View Post
they do have some pretty good sponsorship deals from what ive heard... coca cola, home depot, etc
Quote:
Originally Posted by btn View Post
They own the team outright, so no loan/debt payments to make. They also own the management rights to the arena.
Uhh, nope - at least not according to Forbes.

Forbes has the Thrashers with a 46% Debt/Value - corresponding to ~$66M in debt.

According to Forbes, the only teams which are debt free are the Rangers, Wings, and Blackhawks.

kdb209 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2009, 10:29 PM
  #15
Drake1588
UNATCO
 
Drake1588's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 27,860
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danishh View Post
any explanation for how well the hawks did over the past year? reorganization?
Partly. Dollar Bill drove fans away, they started marketing in droves, hugely successful season, entertaining style of play from a good young team, and a building that seats 20,000 plus.


Last edited by Drake1588: 11-11-2009 at 10:43 PM.
Drake1588 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2009, 10:45 PM
  #16
Blackhawkswincup
Global Moderator
 
Blackhawkswincup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicagoland
Country: United States
Posts: 107,529
vCash: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by topher0805 View Post
Chicago and Pittsburgh's fair weather fans make quite a difference.
Hawks fans aren't fair weather!

We put up with more crap then every other fanbase aside from Leafs during Ballard years.

I dont blame the Hawks fans that walked away, Some took his $@%@ for 20+ yrs before leaving.

The Roenick deal was what finally pushed a good chunk away. Belfour being traded and the Hawks teams of 90's being dismantled + prices going up and no home games on TV finally did it. Even in 02 when we went to playoffs there was hardly any media attention and fan support was luckwarm.

Most people vowed not to spend a dime on Hawks until Wirtz died. Wirtz dies and Hawks rise from ashes


Quote:
Originally Posted by Drake1588 View Post
Partly. Dollar Bill drive fans away, they started marketing in droves, hugely successful season, entertaining style of play from a good young team, and a building that seats 20,000 plus.
Your missing the most important part. Bill Wirtz death!



Hawks fans started coming back during 07-08 season right after the death of "Dollar Bill"

Blackhawkswincup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 12:50 AM
  #17
MAROONSRoad
f/k/a Ghost
 
MAROONSRoad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Maroons Rd.
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,069
vCash: 500
Forbes, as I understand it, doesn't have access to NHL teams' books, although there has been a lot more official data leaked in the past few years -- I wonder if they made any use of it?

A couple of points on this data:

1) In terms of franchise values, they are explicitly including the arena deal economics for each team. So, a team with a very successful arena (with the master lease/management contract) for non-hockey events would be worth a lot more than a team without such arrangement. It is my understanding, for example, that the Edmonton Oilers do not have any access to any non-hockey revenue at their current arena, hence the lower valuation.

2) The revenue data presumably includes revenue sharing for each team that receives such financial support from the league's more successful teams. Thus certain teams listed as making $70 million or so in revenue, may in fact make only $55 million or so once you subtract revenue sharing funds.

These two factors may well have flattened the bell-curve in some of the charts in terms of actual HRR derived in each market and the actual value of an NHL hockey team in each market as a stand alone entity.

GHOST

MAROONSRoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 01:39 AM
  #18
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 56,632
vCash: 500
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/sharks/...rks-operation/
http://www.forbes.com/2009/11/11/nhl...09-wilson.html
Forbes "sings the praises" of the Sharks organization

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 02:13 AM
  #19
MAROONSRoad
f/k/a Ghost
 
MAROONSRoad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Maroons Rd.
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,069
vCash: 500
Some other curious info from the Forbes' charts/statements.

-- Edmonton had plus 9.4 million in operating income last year, without revenue sharing (I understand) and without making the playoffs?

-- San Jose had a negative 5.0 million in operating income last year with about the same revenues as Edmonton and they had a very successful team that made the playoffs.

-- the Predators had negative 5.7 million in operating income despite a low payroll and revenue sharing. Forbes included the following statement:

Quote:
The Predators have suffered from ownership issues (like investors in the franchise not having as much money as they said they had), embarrassing play on the ice and low attendance. In one regard, last season was a good one for the Predators: the team met the 14,000 mark in average per-game paid attendance needed to qualify for a full welfare payment from the league, netting the club more than $10 million. The rumor mill is buzzing that the owners are looking to sell the team, which has sizeable debt and has had a hard time attracting season ticket holders. But even with a favorable lease at the Sommet Center it is quite possible the Predators will be playing in another city before too long.
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2009/31/...rs_310472.html

GHOST

MAROONSRoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 02:52 AM
  #20
Bert Marshall days
Registered User
 
Bert Marshall days's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 3,799
vCash: 500
How does Forbes have Islanders losing only $5.5 mil when their owner claims he's lost $20+ mil every year for the last 5 years?

How does San Jose lose $5 mil a year with great attendance and corporate support?

Bert Marshall days is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 05:42 AM
  #21
Fourier
Registered User
 
Fourier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Waterloo Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,735
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MayDay View Post
I don't understand how the Forbes list always shows the Sabres losing large amounts of money (-$5.2 million in operating income), which is more or less in direct contrast to what we have heard from team ownership and management.

I'm deeply suspicious of Forbes' data because I'd really like to know where they get their numbers from. NHL teams don't open their books. So why does Forbes think they know how much money teams are making or losing?
I have said the same thing on many occasions.

As an Oiler fan, I see that the Oilers made close to $10M by Forbes estiatess despite reports from the team itself that it lost a fair bit last year. Interestingly enough the 13% drop in the $CDN did not seem to affect their profits or their revenue compared with 2007-2008, even with a salary increase of about $6M US. It seems that the Oilers must have done some real wonders in cutting non-salary expenses.

In fact, I notice that depite flat HHR from 2007-2008 to 2008-2009 and a league-wide increase in the salary budget of close to $200M the Forbes estimates for operating income went up by close to $40M US. Again this means that a league with revenues of less than $3 B found close to $250 M in cost savings outside of their player budgets. That's a pretty good trick!

Added in Edit: My numbers above are off since as mouser later points out Forbes may actually include escrow payments in their numbers. Still flat revenues resulted in $50 M in increased operating profits.


Last edited by Fourier: 11-12-2009 at 02:11 PM.
Fourier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 07:21 AM
  #22
TaketheCannoli
RIP
 
TaketheCannoli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 8,577
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GHOSTofMAROONSroad View Post
Forbes, as I understand it, doesn't have access to NHL teams' books, although there has been a lot more official data leaked in the past few years -- I wonder if they made any use of it?





GHOST

According to the Forbes list, the Habs are worth $339 million including $101 million for the Bell Centre. In the same article they state,
Quote:
In July George Gillett agreed to sell his 80% stake in the Canadiens, the Bell Centre and a concert-production business for about $500 million.
This makes this evaluation more than a little suspect.

TaketheCannoli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 08:05 AM
  #23
CC Chiefs*
 
CC Chiefs*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 15,078
vCash: 500
With a struggling economy in MI and the DRW are up 11% in revenues.

CC Chiefs* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 08:52 AM
  #24
Telfo
THRASHERS
 
Telfo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 4,874
vCash: 500
the Thrashers should start making a decent profit when the team gets better and attendance gets to where it should be.

Telfo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 09:08 AM
  #25
The Messenger
Registered User
 
The Messenger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,131
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by c hand 29 View Post
leafs are only first cuz their tickets are so damn expensive, their revenue is huge. its hard to go to one of their games
What a ridiculous postion to be in, the other teams must hate that !!!

The Messenger is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:00 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.