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.

Forbes 2010 Business of Hockey rankings

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-01-2010, 06:30 PM
  #1
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 55,867
vCash: 500
Forbes 2010 Business of Hockey rankings

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/31/...s-10_rank.html


Maple Leafs US$505m to Coyotes US$134m

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 07:15 PM
  #2
Rick Nash homework
Registered User
 
Rick Nash homework's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Massachusetts
Country: United States
Posts: 805
vCash: 500
Just what I expected.

Rick Nash homework is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 07:20 PM
  #3
Gnashville
Never trade Weber
 
Gnashville's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 4,520
vCash: 500



Nice they got the info on the Preds right in our new red uni's with the arizona state flag on the sleeve

Gnashville is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 10:02 PM
  #4
AZcoyotes
So... Now what?
 
AZcoyotes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Phoenix, Az.
Country: United States
Posts: 5,231
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gnashville View Post



Nice they got the info on the Preds right in our new red uni's with the arizona state flag on the sleeve
Lol way to go!!!

AZcoyotes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 10:07 PM
  #5
MoreMogilny
Cap'n
 
MoreMogilny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Oshawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,754
vCash: 500
Philly interrupts the original six there.

Anyways, pretty much as expected.

MoreMogilny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 10:17 PM
  #6
MJB Devils23*
No lockout!
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 37,006
vCash: 500
The Devils make the 11th most revenue and are the 11th most valuable team. But what does everything else mean? Why do they have the highest debt? I wish I was a business major.

MJB Devils23* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 10:18 PM
  #7
Frozen Failure
Best Threadkiller
 
Frozen Failure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,430
vCash: 2111
Send a message via AIM to Frozen Failure Send a message via Yahoo to Frozen Failure
I'm mildly surprised where Dallas is on this list. My question is, why is Dallas earning money, yet other teams like St. Louis, and even Pittsburgh and Washington, in the red?

(I know we're a lot of debt. I hate you Tom Hicks.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Korean Devil 23 View Post
The Devils make the 11th most revenue and are the 11th most valuable team. But what does everything else mean? Why do they have the highest debt? I wish I was a business major.
Includes arena debt. You have a new rink, right?

Frozen Failure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 10:31 PM
  #8
stardog
Registered User
 
stardog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,985
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frozen Failure View Post
I'm mildly surprised where Dallas is on this list. My question is, why is Dallas earning money, yet other teams like St. Louis, and even Pittsburgh and Washington, in the red?

(I know we're a lot of debt. I hate you Tom Hicks.)



Includes arena debt. You have a new rink, right?
I was wondering the same thing about the Pens. My only guess is that with the new arena, it possibly put them into the red?

Someone who knows more about the situation can confirm or shed some light onto this situation.

stardog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 10:31 PM
  #9
Nidema
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,557
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Korean Devil 23 View Post
The Devils make the 11th most revenue and are the 11th most valuable team. But what does everything else mean? Why do they have the highest debt? I wish I was a business major.
Well you guys have a new arena right. So it's probably mostly financed by debt so the high debt to value ratio. It multiples the owner's return on equity so it's a popular way of financing.

Guys, debt is not a bad thing. I would be concerned if a company had low debt leverage.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stardog View Post
I was wondering the same thing about the Pens. My only guess is that with the new arena, it possibly put them into the red?

Someone who knows more about the situation can confirm or shed some light onto this situation.
Operating income doesn't include debt expense. It's purely a function of revenue and cost. My guess is the Excel energy center had cost overruns not debt expense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frozen Failure View Post
I'm mildly surprised where Dallas is on this list. My question is, why is Dallas earning money, yet other teams like St. Louis, and even Pittsburgh and Washington, in the red?

(I know we're a lot of debt. I hate you Tom Hicks.)

Includes arena debt. You have a new rink, right?
Or that Dallas is very cost efficient. Tom Hicks also owns the Cowboys right? Are they part of a same corporation? My guess is cost synergies?

Debt does usually have an adverse effect on value. Take chicago and Vancouver. same operating income. Vancouver has high debt. Vancouver has lower value.


Last edited by Nidema: 12-01-2010 at 10:37 PM.
Nidema is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 10:59 PM
  #10
Classified
Registered User
 
Classified's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,149
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nidema View Post
Guys, debt is not a bad thing. I would be concerned if a company had low debt leverage.
I certainly wouldn't be concerned with low debt, we have no idea what the capital structure of the companies is and the costs associated with raising it, what works for one company might not for another.

Classified is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 11:05 PM
  #11
Nidema
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,557
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Classified View Post
I certainly wouldn't be concerned with low debt, we have no idea what the capital structure of the companies is and the costs associated with raising it, what works for one company might not for another.
True completely. But I would be concerned with a well established company financing a new project mostly through equity.

Again, this is all speculation. We have no idea as to their cost structure.

Nidema is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 11:16 PM
  #12
Mr Dangles
I double dare you.
 
Mr Dangles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 1,991
vCash: 500
If the Blues primary owners are trying to sell is this bad? We are losing money?
So are the Sabres but A guy vowed money to buy them. Would a rich owner be less worried about tight expenses while a group are looking to turn a profit?

I don't know how this works and I'm curious how this affects their sell. I'm pretty sure Checketts has had interest in the Towerbrook's share to be sold and basically said the team must be sold by Dec 31 because of some tax increase.

Mr Dangles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 11:30 PM
  #13
Drij
Registered User
 
Drij's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,667
vCash: 500
Under Colorado.
"The Avalanche did not make the playoffs last season" am I missing something?

Drij is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 11:35 PM
  #14
peter sullivan
Winnipeg
 
peter sullivan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,273
vCash: 500
wow....the islanders have lower revenues than the coyotes...

thrashers gate is $530k/game compared to $1.2m for the flames and $2.1m for the habs.

coyotes gate is $415k/game.

amazing that dallas' gate is only $750k/game but they are 10th in revenues.

the lesson here is that cold cities like hockey and warm cities dont....surprise surprise.


bottom 8 in revenues: florida, columbus, tampa, carolina, nashville, atlanta, phoenix, NYI.

so gary, how's that non-traditional market expansion working out for you....that big TV contract should be here any day now.

peter sullivan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 11:38 PM
  #15
Nidema
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,557
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Dangles View Post
If the Blues primary owners are trying to sell is this bad? We are losing money?
So are the Sabres but A guy vowed money to buy them. Would a rich owner be less worried about tight expenses while a group are looking to turn a profit?

I don't know how this works and I'm curious how this affects their sell. I'm pretty sure Checketts has had interest in the Towerbrook's share to be sold and basically said the team must be sold by Dec 31 because of some tax increase.
Well in general, if a company is barely making money and is pressing against the budget, that's always a cause for concern. Who knows with hockey though? Some owners are fine with not making a killing because they love the team and the sport.

For the blues, they lost 6% compared to last year. That could easily be the difference between making the playoffs and not making the playoffs.

I think the tax increase you're refering to is tax on capital gains.

Nidema is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 11:52 PM
  #16
Mr Dangles
I double dare you.
 
Mr Dangles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 1,991
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nidema View Post
Well in general, if a company is barely making money and is pressing against the budget, that's always a cause for concern. Who knows with hockey though? Some owners are fine with not making a killing because they love the team and the sport.

For the blues, they lost 6% compared to last year. That could easily be the difference between making the playoffs and not making the playoffs.

I think the tax increase you're refering to is tax on capital gains.
I figured this, though this most likely won't be the case for the Blues.

Mr Dangles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2010, 12:45 AM
  #17
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by peter sullivan View Post
bottom 8 in revenues: florida, columbus, tampa, carolina, nashville, atlanta, phoenix, NYI.
Feel bad for Carolina. That is one well-run organization, with very good on-ice results, all accomplished under strict budgets. It's really too bad they're in such a bad hockey market, those guys in a real market with a proper fan base and a big budget would be most impressive.

  Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2010, 01:32 AM
  #18
Jeffrey93
Registered User
 
Jeffrey93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,188
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/31/...s-10_rank.html


Maple Leafs US$505m to Coyotes US$134m
It's absolutely hilarious to me that they gauge the worth of the Thrashers at a mere one million more than the lowly Coyotes.

Everyone should go back and read ALL the Coyotes Bankruptcy threads....after reading ALL of them in their entirety....realize that.....

the Thrashers are valued to be worth ONE MILLION more than that franchise.

Geez.

I mean Forbes....say what you want...they aren't idiots. They figure the Coyotes lose about $20M a year....and the Thrashers lose about $8M a year. And they STILL figure the Thrashers are only worth a million more than the Coyotes.

That's GOTTA hurt.

Again....say what you will about the Forbes people....they deal with business and numbers....no emotions. And this is what they came up with......even if you think they are all high on shrooms and don't know their head from a pillow..it's still must sting a bit to the folks in Atlanta.

Jeffrey93 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2010, 01:43 AM
  #19
Roadrage
Registered User
 
Roadrage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Next door
Country: Netherlands
Posts: 276
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nidema View Post
Or that Dallas is very cost efficient. Tom Hicks also owns the Cowboys right? Are they part of a same corporation? My guess is cost synergies?

Debt does usually have an adverse effect on value. Take chicago and Vancouver. same operating income. Vancouver has high debt. Vancouver has lower value.
No, Tom Hicks does not own the Cowboys (That would be Jerry Jones). Hicks did however own the Texas Rangers (until finally sold in an auction in August) and 50% owner of Liverpool FC of the English Premiership until it was sold in October.

Roadrage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2010, 05:03 AM
  #20
OthmarAmmann
Money making machine
 
OthmarAmmann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: NYC
Posts: 2,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffrey93 View Post
It's absolutely hilarious to me that they gauge the worth of the Thrashers at a mere one million more than the lowly Coyotes.

Everyone should go back and read ALL the Coyotes Bankruptcy threads....after reading ALL of them in their entirety....realize that.....

the Thrashers are valued to be worth ONE MILLION more than that franchise.

Geez.

I mean Forbes....say what you want...they aren't idiots. They figure the Coyotes lose about $20M a year....and the Thrashers lose about $8M a year. And they STILL figure the Thrashers are only worth a million more than the Coyotes.

That's GOTTA hurt.

Again....say what you will about the Forbes people....they deal with business and numbers....no emotions. And this is what they came up with......even if you think they are all high on shrooms and don't know their head from a pillow..it's still must sting a bit to the folks in Atlanta.
No, what's funny is that the Coyotes valuation is $60 mm less than the contemplated purchase price. Of course, that purchase price comes with ancillary revenue and possibly some sort of guarantee. Considering the revenue is possibly $25 / yr for five years though, either the team or the revenue is getting a huge haircut.

OthmarAmmann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2010, 05:50 AM
  #21
Morris Wanchuk
.......
 
Morris Wanchuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: War Memorial Arena
Country: United States
Posts: 14,853
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Morris Wanchuk
I want Jeremy Jacobs accountants.

The Bruins only made 2.6 MIL last year? Riiiight

Morris Wanchuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2010, 07:48 AM
  #22
CC Chiefs*
 
CC Chiefs*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 15,078
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/31/...s-10_rank.html


Maple Leafs US$505m to Coyotes US$134m
Is it not troubling that 16 teams lost money in 2010?

CC Chiefs* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2010, 08:02 AM
  #23
Kebekoi
Registered User
 
Kebekoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Matane, QC
Country: Martinique
Posts: 1,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
Feel bad for Carolina. That is one well-run organization, with very good on-ice results, all accomplished under strict budgets. It's really too bad they're in such a bad hockey market, those guys in a real market with a proper fan base and a big budget would be most impressive.
Hartford with a good owner?

Kebekoi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2010, 08:28 AM
  #24
Telfo
THRASHERS
 
Telfo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 4,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CC Chiefs View Post
Is it not troubling that 16 teams lost money in 2010?
thats not out of the ordinary for pro sports teams. the team value is usually what cancels that out

Telfo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2010, 10:03 AM
  #25
MessierIsGod
Registered User
 
MessierIsGod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 466
vCash: 500
All the canadian teams are doing well (positive OI) and the Buttman blocks every move up north. What a moron.

MessierIsGod 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 09:37 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.