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 2012 annual review of NHL

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-28-2012, 03:19 PM
  #26
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,506
vCash: 500
Big picture: League-wide finances improved considerably since 2011. Teams operating at a loss dropped from 18 to 13, league-wide net profit jumped from $120M to $250M. Profit of the top teams didn't raise much, which means that the bottom 27 teams started to close the gap (which I think was always going to happen at some point, it couldn't have kept widening at that rate forever).

haseoke39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 03:22 PM
  #27
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 56,980
vCash: 500
I think the big jump in Leafs value is directly related to the sale price in the last year.


Also interesting that the top six teams by value are the "Original Six".

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 03:22 PM
  #28
Raym11
Phaneuf sucks
 
Raym11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by syc View Post
But then they won't get that billion dollar US TV deal owners were promised 10 years ago...Oh yeah and US based teams ticket sales will take a hit because they will have more teams from Canada coming to town. Ask any US owner and they will tell you they sell less tickets when a Canadian team comes to town.
Excluding the Leafs

Raym11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 03:28 PM
  #29
Colin226
NJ Devils STH
 
Colin226's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Flemington, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 3,213
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raym11 View Post
Excluding the Leafs
More people from Montreal come to New Jersey every season than Toronto fans.. By a huge margin.. Just my 2 cents

Colin226 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 03:29 PM
  #30
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 56,980
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nanuk23 View Post
From article:
Quote:
Last season the hockey faithful filled arenas to 95.6% of capacity while delivering television rating increases to both national and local partners. They spent 25% more on jerseys and 41% more on hats, contributing to a 15% increase in overall merchandise sales. Over 4 million more fans followed their teams on Facebook in the last year for a total of over 14 million fans currently engaged on the social network. On Twitter, 3 million more fans followed their teams in the past year to bring the NHL fan universe there above 4.1 million.
Think it will be different this time though? Think again, again. Two-thirds of NHL teams reported zero season ticket holder cancellations. Granted, many teams never put that option on the table. But even among the few that did give fans an out, they only reported a handful walked away. To boot, the teams replaced them with fans on their waiting list. The Columbus Blue Jackets even reported that season ticket holders have gone up slightly since the start of the lockout.

So Forbes thinks fans will (continue) to flock back, even if there's a lost season.

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 03:29 PM
  #31
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
Also interesting that the top six teams by value are the "Original Six".
That is funny. I don't think we'd see Detroit in that position if it weren't for their overwhelming success over the last 20 years. I also wonder what Chicago was ranked at a few years back as well.

haseoke39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 03:32 PM
  #32
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 56,980
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CpatainCanuck View Post
I didn't know about the provision that teams in markets with more than 2.5 million households can't receive revenue sharing.
There's talk of removing market size limit for revenue sharing recipients (as the Islanders for one get none due to their market) in the CBA being negotiated.

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 03:40 PM
  #33
hawksfan50
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 3,056
vCash: 500
The figures i guess include ALL REVENUES not just HRR..

If so, the Chicago case for example states:

REVENUES: $125 million

OPERATING INCOME : $20.9 million


ASSUMING approx. 70 million on salaries last year (they still had to pay Huet) to players --this leaves approx $55 million-the remaining operating income of $20.9 million --ie. it leaves approx $34.1 million to run all other expenses except interest,depreciation,amortization and taxes...

Now travel,insurance,minor leagues, coaching staff,all office staff and depts.including upto McD,hockey ambassadors,and any other hockey related expenses eat up this 34.1 million which one might think should be nearly about the same expense cost for everyteam (though it is possible some teams save on staff ,spend less on marketing, but otherwise a lot of the costs for the other expenses are nearly the same unless you share an ahl affiliate with another nhl team to halve that cost-- travel costs could be less for Eastern time zone teams that play mostly in closer proximity games to their most frewuent competitors in a dIvision of coNference...But allowing for some divergence in this category we PROBABLY get approx $25-$34 million reqiured to fund such expenses ...clubs spending at the max probably spend to the high end of this range...

so this means that a CAP team needs approx $105 million to just cover salaries and these other hockey expenses before any leftover for taxes,interest,amortization
and depreciation expense allocations...

At the bottom end though,you get NYI with just $66million in REVENUES
--even at the floor level of cap approxmationg payroll they still managed a remainder of $16million operating income --must have been some very cheap office overhead and maybe travel cost savings are mmuch much greater than i had assimed for certain teams in their Division in the Eastern Conference.. $66m-$48.3m = $17.7m remaining -$16 million in operating income--leaves only $1.7 million for minor leagues,coaches,travel,insur. and office staff and depts. expenses..


SO how did WANG get away so cheaply when Rocky Wirts had to spend approx $34.1 million for all that?

Can someone make sense of this wide apparent disparity...Maybe $10 million off I could fathom --but $32.4 million off on such apparent ''necessary" costs to run an NHL team? Accountants please explain!

hawksfan50 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 03:42 PM
  #34
WingedWheel1987
Ken Holland's office
 
WingedWheel1987's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: GPP Michigan
Posts: 8,562
vCash: 500
The disparity between the rich and the poor is ridiculous. No amount of handouts are going to fix this problem.

WingedWheel1987 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 03:42 PM
  #35
DanZ
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 8,394
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nanuk23 View Post
Pittsburgh at #1 is a joke. Montreal and Toronto are clearly above them, not even a question.

DanZ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 04:01 PM
  #36
dynastyREredux
Where's the Doritos?
 
dynastyREredux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: All over Canada
Posts: 1,296
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dynastyREredux
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raym11 View Post
Excluding the Leafs
I don't think there's any evidence the Leafs are an overly big draw in the States, maybe more than say Edmonton or Winnipeg because of their name and history but likely not more than Montreal. Those 2 have some name cache but other than their fan base making the trip to another arena, I doubt either is driving a lot of neutral fans to the arena.

dynastyREredux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 04:06 PM
  #37
Hawkscap
Registered User
 
Hawkscap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,718
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawksfan50 View Post
The figures i guess include ALL REVENUES not just HRR..

If so, the Chicago case for example states:

REVENUES: $125 million

OPERATING INCOME : $20.9 million


ASSUMING approx. 70 million on salaries last year (they still had to pay Huet) to players --this leaves approx $55 million-the remaining operating income of $20.9 million --ie. it leaves approx $34.1 million to run all other expenses except interest,depreciation,amortization and taxes...

Now travel,insurance,minor leagues, coaching staff,all office staff and depts.including upto McD,hockey ambassadors,and any other hockey related expenses eat up this 34.1 million which one might think should be nearly about the same expense cost for everyteam (though it is possible some teams save on staff ,spend less on marketing, but otherwise a lot of the costs for the other expenses are nearly the same unless you share an ahl affiliate with another nhl team to halve that cost-- travel costs could be less for Eastern time zone teams that play mostly in closer proximity games to their most frewuent competitors in a dIvision of coNference...But allowing for some divergence in this category we PROBABLY get approx $25-$34 million reqiured to fund such expenses ...clubs spending at the max probably spend to the high end of this range...

so this means that a CAP team needs approx $105 million to just cover salaries and these other hockey expenses before any leftover for taxes,interest,amortization
and depreciation expense allocations...

At the bottom end though,you get NYI with just $66million in REVENUES
--even at the floor level of cap approxmationg payroll they still managed a remainder of $16million operating income --must have been some very cheap office overhead and maybe travel cost savings are mmuch much greater than i had assimed for certain teams in their Division in the Eastern Conference.. $66m-$48.3m = $17.7m remaining -$16 million in operating income--leaves only $1.7 million for minor leagues,coaches,travel,insur. and office staff and depts. expenses..


SO how did WANG get away so cheaply when Rocky Wirts had to spend approx $34.1 million for all that?

Can someone make sense of this wide apparent disparity...Maybe $10 million off I could fathom --but $32.4 million off on such apparent ''necessary" costs to run an NHL team? Accountants please explain!

I am guessing that the Hawks are repaying the loans they took from Wirtz Co during the 2000s. $40 mil alone for the 06 season.

Hawkscap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 04:18 PM
  #38
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Posts: 29,933
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WingedWheel1987 View Post
The disparity between the rich and the poor is ridiculous. No amount of handouts are going to fix this problem.

Sounds like the Forbes guys agree.

Fugu is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 04:19 PM
  #39
tradervik
Advanced potatoes
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 180
vCash: 500
Operating income is not net profit

As per the article, operating income is earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization.

So if a team has $10 million in operating income but has to pay $2 million in taxes, the actual profit is $8 million. If the team is paying off a loan and/or has substantial assets to depreciate, the profit is even lower. So you can't add up the operating income of all the teams to come out with the net profit for the league.

tradervik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 04:20 PM
  #40
Morris Wanchuk
.......
 
Morris Wanchuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: War Memorial Arena
Country: United States
Posts: 15,015
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Morris Wanchuk
I wonder how this takes into account arenas.

I know the top 3 teams own the team and arena as one entity but Chicago and Boston own their arenas under different business.

I would imagine if the Bruins package of the TD Garden, Bruins, and 20% of NESN would fetch far more than $348 mil.

Morris Wanchuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 04:22 PM
  #41
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Posts: 29,933
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tradervik View Post
As per the article, operating income is earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization.

So if a team has $10 million in operating income but has to pay $2 million in taxes, the actual profit is $8 million. If the team is paying off a loan and/or has substantial assets to depreciate, the profit is even lower. So you can't add up the operating income of all the teams to come out with the net profit for the league.

Moreover you cannot get a net profit for the league at all, seeing these are 30 separate taxable entities. They will be taxed at a rate dependent on how the owner has the deductions and portfolio set up in general (which usually is the one that is most favorable to his overall holdings).

Fugu is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 04:26 PM
  #42
Bert Marshall days
Registered User
 
Bert Marshall days's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 3,820
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tradervik View Post
As per the article, operating income is earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization.

So if a team has $10 million in operating income but has to pay $2 million in taxes, the actual profit is $8 million. If the team is paying off a loan and/or has substantial assets to depreciate, the profit is even lower. So you can't add up the operating income of all the teams to come out with the net profit for the league.
So if a team has -$16 million in operating income, they lost more than $16 mil when you factor in interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization per Forbes?

Holy crapoly!

Bert Marshall days is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 04:29 PM
  #43
InjuredChoker
Registered User
 
InjuredChoker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: LTIR or golf course
Posts: 19,734
vCash: 872
In this thread Sharks ownership apparently claims they lost 15 mil; Forbes says they only lost 0.9 mil. That doesn't add up.

Too bad that the link isn't working there anymore so can't see the full article.

But I recall that there was talk that Jets made profit around 13 mil the same Forbes is saying. Not sure though.

edit. taxes, other interests, depreciation etc could account for that close to 15 mil difference.


Last edited by InjuredChoker: 11-28-2012 at 04:36 PM.
InjuredChoker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 04:34 PM
  #44
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,126
vCash: 500
Love or hate the Forbes numbers, you have to accept they're the best we have to work off of.

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 04:36 PM
  #45
Gotta Catch Em Staal
The Red Scare of '14
 
Gotta Catch Em Staal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 7,212
vCash: 500
Quote:
“The Sun Belt has had plenty of time to prove that the viability doesn’t work.” Dorweiler thinks Quebec, where ground has already been broken for a new arena, will eventually get an NHL team, and he also thinks Portland, where minor league hockey is popular, and Seattle, where the city has approved a new arena, would be better cities to house teams than Arizona, North Carolina and Florida, where NHL teams are losing money.
Cool another article singling out my team because they are in the south even though they have an extremely healthy ownership situation and there are 8 teams with a worse operating income (including in New York, Buffalo, St. Louis and Columbus).

__________________
-Jonathan
Gotta Catch Em Staal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 04:42 PM
  #46
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,126
vCash: 500
The Coyotes numbers seem rather odd though. According to Forbes, their revenue numbers are within $10m of 8 other teams. If this is right, the market is not as hopeless as we've been lead to believe.

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 04:44 PM
  #47
Nanuk23
Registered User
 
Nanuk23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 382
vCash: 500
Pierre LeBrun ‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun
Quote from MLSE COO and prez Tom Anselmi on Forbes story listing Leafs as first billion-dollar hockey team: ``I'm intrigued by the

Pierre LeBrun ‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun
evaluation and the recent MLSE acquisition clearly demonstrates the growing importance of all of our franchises to our fans...'' con't


Pierre LeBrun ‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun
but I have no idea of how they came up with that number. '' end quote

Nanuk23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 04:44 PM
  #48
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,126
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HaroldVonKimblestein View Post
Cool another article singling out my team because they are in the south even though they have an extremely healthy ownership situation and there are 8 teams with a worse operating income (including in New York, Buffalo, St. Louis and Columbus).
I think the revenue numbers are probably more significant here, as they are a judge of the relative strength of the market.

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 04:49 PM
  #49
Some Other Flame
Registered User
 
Some Other Flame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 820
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by topher42 View Post
Escapes me how Keith ($8 mil) and Hossa ($7.9 mil) are not on that list.
It's a little bizarre. They acknowledge Crosby's getting paid $12M in actual dollars in each of the first three seasons of his newly signed deal, but then say he's the highest paid player at $12.7M, because his cap hit is $8.7M and his endorsements are $4M a year. His actual income per year is $16M including everything based on their figures.

It makes you think just how in-depth do the folks at Forbes really go.

Some Other Flame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 04:54 PM
  #50
InjuredChoker
Registered User
 
InjuredChoker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: LTIR or golf course
Posts: 19,734
vCash: 872
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nanuk23 View Post
Pierre LeBrun ‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun
Quote from MLSE COO and prez Tom Anselmi on Forbes story listing Leafs as first billion-dollar hockey team: ``I'm intrigued by the

Pierre LeBrun ‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun
evaluation and the recent MLSE acquisition clearly demonstrates the growing importance of all of our franchises to our fans...'' con't


Pierre LeBrun ‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun
but I have no idea of how they came up with that number. '' end quote


This can't be too good for Forbes reliability, eh?

And yeah, if Coyotes only lost around 20 mi (before taxes etc, though) they are not doing THAT bad, when they get stability, their income will rise.

But on the other hand they won't always make the conference finals.

Another thing; Dallas Stars. They didn't make the playoffs, suffered in attendance and still turned profit and made more revenue than Minnesota, Buffalo.

InjuredChoker 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 10:32 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.