HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Toronto Maple Leafs
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Maple Leafs 1st NHL team worth $1 billion US

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-28-2012, 09:29 PM
  #51
The Apologist
Where's JVR?
 
The Apologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Leaf Nation Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,980
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by charliolemieux View Post
Two or three years ago just from the TV deals, every owner of every franchise put $2M PROFIT in his pockets.

That was before a single ticket, or hotdog was sold.

That is why they are so valuable.
Do you think they got the huge tv deal because they had 5 teams in the league? Or because they have 32 teams that could in any given season win it all? Including in such markets as Miami, Boston, New York, Houston, Dallas, Minneapolis, Aka all corners of the country?
The NFL didn't start out as a huge powerhouse full of success stories. They have done a lot of sharing amongst each other to get there. Having the players under their thumbs hasn't hurt either.

The Apologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 09:45 PM
  #52
thecatch22
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 567
vCash: 500
NHL wants to be like the NFL only with most of the league losing money, 83% of revenue coming from three teams and a cap system that allows the rich to pocket more money and the poor teams to remain poor but more competitive.

There is no equalizer like the NFL's TV deal to offset market interest. Faster the league moves away from a hard cap and towards a softcap with luxury tax the better.

I would also suggest a max contract length and percent of cap spent per player to level the playing field somewhat.

thecatch22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 09:48 PM
  #53
charliolemieux
rsTmf
 
charliolemieux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,581
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazeeEddie View Post
Do you think they got the huge tv deal because they had 5 teams in the league? Or because they have 32 teams that could in any given season win it all? Including in such markets as Miami, Boston, New York, Houston, Dallas, Minneapolis, Aka all corners of the country?
The NFL didn't start out as a huge powerhouse full of success stories. They have done a lot of sharing amongst each other to get there. Having the players under their thumbs hasn't hurt either.
Actually Gambling has more to do with why the NFL is so big than anything.

Jacksonville closes the top section of the stadium for NFL games but fills it for college games. Which would seem counter intuitive but that is what I heard.

Any team can make it theoretically, but in reality there is an ebb and flow as to the contenders and bottom feeders. Usually.

Football in the states is just huge. Having only 16 games a year and making every game so valuable has a part in why it is popular.


You are right. There is something between Green Bay and Chicago each bailing the other out at different times. How many times has a team moved in and out of LA, or St. Louis? There has been several instances of teams failing. But the TV money is too big now. They split it and everyone walks away a winner.

There is no chance of failure.

charliolemieux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 09:59 PM
  #54
hockeyfanz*
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,913
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nodeal View Post
Only a billion? Raise those ticket prices!
What a dynasty the Leafs have built. Not the kind I dreamed of when I was a kid.

hockeyfanz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 10:01 PM
  #55
Kane One
HFB Partner
 
Kane One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Brooklyn, New NY
Country: United States
Posts: 31,542
vCash: 2400
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazeeEddie View Post
And why is it that every team in the NFL is so valuable?
The massive TV deals..

The NFL makes probably double the amount of TV revenue in a single season than the NHL will make from the entire NBC deal.

__________________
Kane One is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 10:13 PM
  #56
Peasy
apple CORes = SOFT
 
Peasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: North Bay
Country: Estonia
Posts: 7,544
vCash: 960
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mystifo View Post
Interesting fact: If one person was to win the jackpot on Power Ball they would have enough money to purchase both the St.Louis Blues AND The Phoenix Coyotes. Just imagine if you could buy both and morph them into a super team?
Taxes bruh.

Plus then you'd probably go bankrupt with them.

Peasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 10:14 PM
  #57
Grant
LL Genius
 
Grant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: London
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,531
vCash: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazeeEddie View Post
And why is it that every team in the NFL is so valuable?
Quote:
Originally Posted by charliolemieux View Post
Two or three years ago just from the TV deals, every owner of every franchise put $2M PROFIT in his pockets.

That was before a single ticket, or hotdog was sold.

That is why they are so valuable.
TV deal is the biggest contributor to NFL teams being worth so much more. As Charlio said, that extra money is huge on the bottom line.

Also with NFL which has helped tremendously over the years is that they have had a 60/40 revenue split for quite some time now. That is the home team gets 60% of the gate revenue and the away team gets 40%. This very generous revenue sharing allows the small market teams to compete with the big market teams since they get so much of the money when they go to play other teams.

Quote:
Originally Posted by charliolemieux View Post
Actually Gambling has more to do with why the NFL is so big than anything.

Jacksonville closes the top section of the stadium for NFL games but fills it for college games. Which would seem counter intuitive but that is what I heard.

Any team can make it theoretically, but in reality there is an ebb and flow as to the contenders and bottom feeders. Usually.

Football in the states is just huge. Having only 16 games a year and making every game so valuable has a part in why it is popular.


You are right. There is something between Green Bay and Chicago each bailing the other out at different times. How many times has a team moved in and out of LA, or St. Louis? There has been several instances of teams failing. But the TV money is too big now. They split it and everyone walks away a winner.

There is no chance of failure.
That isn't necessarily because they failed, but because they could make more money elsewhere.

When the LA Rams moved to St Louis, the team was doing fine, one of the better financially in the league. They moved because they got a much better stadium agreement which allowed them to be more profitable. Things in stadium agreements that can make a big difference is the amount of money the team gets from the luxury box suites (this money isn't included in the gate revenue sharing so it all goes straight to the team), concessions revenue, parking revenue, naming rights etc. The Rams got a better stadium agreement in St Louis so they packed up and left since it got them more money than they were currently making.

Similar thing with the Dodgers in baseball. Originally in Brooklyn, they were THE MOST profitable team in the league. They got a much better stadium agreement in LA (also not many baseball teams were out west at this time so they got a larger fanbase) so they left to make better money.

Grant is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 10:28 PM
  #58
pooleboy
#chychrun2016
 
pooleboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Ontario
Posts: 6,386
vCash: 500
could be very interesting if they make a new league

pooleboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 10:39 PM
  #59
charliolemieux
rsTmf
 
charliolemieux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,581
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grant View Post
TV deal is the biggest contributor to NFL teams being worth so much more. As Charlio said, that extra money is huge on the bottom line.

Also with NFL which has helped tremendously over the years is that they have had a 60/40 revenue split for quite some time now. That is the home team gets 60% of the gate revenue and the away team gets 40%. This very generous revenue sharing allows the small market teams to compete with the big market teams since they get so much of the money when they go to play other teams.



That isn't necessarily because they failed, but because they could make more money elsewhere.

When the LA Rams moved to St Louis, the team was doing fine, one of the better financially in the league. They moved because they got a much better stadium agreement which allowed them to be more profitable. Things in stadium agreements that can make a big difference is the amount of money the team gets from the luxury box suites (this money isn't included in the gate revenue sharing so it all goes straight to the team), concessions revenue, parking revenue, naming rights etc. The Rams got a better stadium agreement in St Louis so they packed up and left since it got them more money than they were currently making.

Similar thing with the Dodgers in baseball. Originally in Brooklyn, they were THE MOST profitable team in the league. They got a much better stadium agreement in LA (also not many baseball teams were out west at this time so they got a larger fanbase) so they left to make better money.
I should have spaced that out more.

I was also refering to early on where teams came and went like they did early on in the NHL. There was a lot of failure before they got together and figured it out. No franchise has actually folded since 1952.

charliolemieux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 11:08 PM
  #60
Leafs For Life*
Nothing
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 6,636
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peasy View Post
Taxes bruh.

Plus then you'd probably go bankrupt with them.
Lol don't ruin the fun.. but damn imagine the team of PHX+STL put together

Doan-Backes-Oshie
Perron-Vermette/Berglund-Stewart
Steen-Hanzal-Boedker
Korpikoski-Brule/Chipchura-BizNasty

OEL-Pietrangelo
Yandle-Shattenkirk
Morris-Klesla

Halak-Smith

Mix of Tippett and Hitchcock.

Prospects: Tarasenko, Schwartz, Gormley, Rundblad.

Leaves: Berglund/Vermette, Vrbata, Cole, Polak, Russell, Huskins, Elliott, D'Agostini, McDonald, Aucoin, and prospects all for a 1C while also accounting who would be tooken out (Backes to 1st line RW, Oshie to 2nd line C/RW)

Edit: And imagine that, with trading to your favorite team everything they want as in the Leafs recieving OEL, Piet, etc. FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUDGE dude.. we would laugh at all these haters.


Last edited by Leafs For Life*: 11-28-2012 at 11:15 PM.
Leafs For Life* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 11:16 PM
  #61
The Apologist
Where's JVR?
 
The Apologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Leaf Nation Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,980
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by charliolemieux View Post
Actually Gambling has more to do with why the NFL is so big than anything.

Jacksonville closes the top section of the stadium for NFL games but fills it for college games. Which would seem counter intuitive but that is what I heard.

Any team can make it theoretically, but in reality there is an ebb and flow as to the contenders and bottom feeders. Usually.

Football in the states is just huge. Having only 16 games a year and making every game so valuable has a part in why it is popular.


You are right. There is something between Green Bay and Chicago each bailing the other out at different times. How many times has a team moved in and out of LA, or St. Louis? There has been several instances of teams failing. But the TV money is too big now. They split it and everyone walks away a winner.

There is no chance of failure.
If the NHL teams bailed each other out like the NFL teams did we'd all be fine.

It'll never happen in the NHL rhough

The Apologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 11:27 PM
  #62
Kane One
HFB Partner
 
Kane One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Brooklyn, New NY
Country: United States
Posts: 31,542
vCash: 2400
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazeeEddie View Post
If the NHL teams bailed each other out like the NFL teams did we'd all be fine.

It'll never happen in the NHL rhough
The NHL isn't currently profitable enough to bail teams out all the time.

With the NFL, if you have 31 teams who are all making money, I doubt there would be a single owner who cares about bailing out that one team.

Kane One is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 11:39 PM
  #63
Urban Explorer*
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: West T.dot
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,456
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaneone View Post
Rangers fan here. I'm not proposing that the NHL gets rid of the salary cap completely, but there should be a luxury tax. It's unfair to us (fans of the richer teams) that we spend more money to see a game than other teams, yet we don't get anything in return.

It's even more unfair to the Canadian teams that taxes are much higher there than in the US, yet the salary cap is the same.

According to Forbes, the Rangers' revenue per fan was $31 and the Leafs' was $35. Want to know what Washington's (just a random team I thought of, so nothing against them) was? $17. We should have to spend an equal amount of money on players as them?

Fans of these teams say, "Oh, it's unfair that the Leafs and Rangers could buy talent." How's it unfair? THE FANS are buying the talent. If these fans drive up the ticket market for their team, the prices would increase, and they would be able to spend as much as us. They complain about what's unfair, but no one shows up to their games. What money do they expect to be used to sign free agents?
I couldn't agree more with your post but I would also add something.. in my opinion this artificially "parity" that a cap world brings really takes the "mystique" out of the league. Now you have #8 seeded teams with sub .500 records winning the cup. I miss the days of losing to stacked teams like the "red wings" (when we were in the west), then when you beat them it's just so much more epic.

I miss dynasties. I miss the #1 seeds in the cup final. I miss an upset actually being an UPSET.

It seems more and more like flipping a coin is viable tool in predicting hockey games these days.

Urban Explorer* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 11:47 PM
  #64
pickincherries
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Mississauga
Country: Canada
Posts: 101
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grant View Post
Some things teams have done or currently do to make income look lower than it is (for tax purposes):

1. Players are considered as 'assets' for teams. In accounting you are supposed to depreciate assets that will generate revenue for more than 1 year to better match their cost with the revenue they generate. What this does is not only do the teams pay the players and list the players salary as 'salary expense', but you also take their salary and make it a depreciation expense. Basically double counting some of the players salary and reducing it from your income to make your income look less than it is.

2. Team Owners have paid themselves a salary.
eg. Say a team gets 100m in revenue and an income of 0, now the owner pays them self a 10m salary. This now reduces the income of the team to -10m, increases the income of the owner from 0 to 10m on their personal income tax (PIT). You can make your team a certain type of corporation that makes it become a 'pass through firm' letting any income from the team go towards your PIT. The team's income is -10m, the owners income is 10m. The teams income gets passed through to the owner and now it appears as if the owner has no income and therefore doesn't pay and PIT.

3. Reserve senior positions in the company to family (fairly similar to #2)

4. Borrow money from the team at a 0% interest rate.
Now the owner can invest the borrowed money and make it look like a loss and again similar to #2 reduce their taxes.

5. Revenue Shifting
eg. Rogers owns the Jays. Rogers broadcasts the Jays game. Rogers doesn't pay the Jays the market value for the rights to broadcast the games. Jays get less revenue because of this, shifting the revenue instead to Rogers. Jays earning less money allows them to get some more money from the league profit sharing (or pay less into the league profit sharing, I'm not sure on how it works in the MLB).


Tricks like these are (or once were) legal. All accounting practices are followed and no rules are broken. These are some examples of how teams make it look like they are losing money when they really aren't.
#2. It makes no sense to take out a salary that large when your corporation is losing money. Why? Personal income tax gets taxed at a much higher rate (35%+) vs. 10-15% for most corporations.

#4. You can't borrow money from a corp and claim it as a loss. Simply doesn't work like that or everyone would just pay themselves in loans lol. That money has to be repaid. So yes, you can take it and invest it however you want but you have to pay that money back within a year or the corporation has to start charging you interest.

pickincherries is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 11:49 PM
  #65
DeVoice
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Sarnia
Country: Canada
Posts: 298
vCash: 500
well this is easy to understand
Ticket to game...100,000 dollars
Parking.....10000 dollars.
beer...5000 dollars.
Pizza 2000 dollars

times that by the number of seats and tadaaa 1 billion

DeVoice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-28-2012, 11:58 PM
  #66
Grant
LL Genius
 
Grant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: London
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,531
vCash: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by m0rtal View Post
#2. It makes no sense to take out a salary that large when your corporation is losing money. Why? Personal income tax gets taxed at a much higher rate (35%+) vs. 10-15% for most corporations.

#4. You can't borrow money from a corp and claim it as a loss. Simply doesn't work like that or everyone would just pay themselves in loans lol. That money has to be repaid. So yes, you can take it and invest it however you want but you have to pay that money back within a year or the corporation has to start charging you interest.
#2 has to be paired with the team being a pass through firm where the income of the team then gets transferred to PIT. In the example I gave for #2 the owner paid himself 10m but because the team he owned 'lost' 10m, which he could then deduct from his other income on his PIT, it results in him paying 0 income tax because it looks like overall he earned 0 income.

Otherwise you are right, PIT is higher than CPT so it would be stupid to do that without having the firm be a pass through firm.

#4 looking back I don't really know how it works, I just know I took a note on it during my class

Grant is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-29-2012, 10:41 AM
  #67
Mess
Global Moderator
 
Mess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 65,497
vCash: 500
FORBES names the Leafs the richest franchise

&

ESPN names the Leafs the worst franchise in North America.

Quote:
The Toronto Maple Leafs have hit a new low, at least according to ESPN Magazine. The American sports publication has branded the Leafs as the worst professional sports franchise in their annual 'Ultimate Standings.'

The ranking, based on a variety of factors include categories such as 'fan relations,' 'ownership,' 'affordability,' 'stadium experience' and 'title track record," amongst others.

The Leafs did not crack the Top 100 in any one of the magazine's eight core ranking categories, finishing three spots behind ESPN's next-worst NHL franchise, the New York Islanders.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=404736
So what is wrong with this picture that the team that is worth the most through loyal fan support, delivers among the worst fan experience in return?

Will be great again some day when MLSE rewards their fans equally for making them a billionaire franchise. Seems like only one party is holding up their side of this relationship.

__________________
---------------------------------------------------
Signature: “If you think there’s no pain coming, there’s pain coming,”.. Mike Babcock
---------------------------------------------------
Mess is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-29-2012, 10:46 AM
  #68
ACC1224
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 32,716
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mess View Post
FORBES names the Leafs the richest franchise

&

ESPN names the Leafs the worst franchise in North America.


So what is wrong with this picture that the team that is worth the most through loyal fan support, delivers among the worst fan experience in return?

Will be great again some day when MLSE rewards their fans equally for making them a billionaire franchise. Seems like only one party is holding up their side of this relationship.
Would it be better if they were bad and poor?

ACC1224 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-29-2012, 11:16 AM
  #69
Kyle Doobas*
#groovystats
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,689
vCash: 159
What's wrong with that picture is that you're quoting hockey articles from ESPN

Kyle Doobas* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-29-2012, 11:23 AM
  #70
hockeyfanz*
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,913
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Stallone View Post
What's wrong with that picture is that you're quoting hockey articles from ESPN
Yeah clearly that's the problem with the Leafs. It has nothing to do with the team, the management of the team or the owners or the fans. Its all ESPN's fault...Hilarious.

hockeyfanz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-29-2012, 11:36 AM
  #71
Mess
Global Moderator
 
Mess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 65,497
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyfanz View Post
Yeah clearly that's the problem with the Leafs. It has nothing to do with the team, the management of the team or the owners or the fans. Its all ESPN's fault...Hilarious.
Leaf fans return on investment is a losing proposition for them and a windfall financially for MLSE.

Now you can see why the Owners need a lockout and feel the need to squeeze the fans money out of the players, in order to increase their franchise values and profitability levels for themselves.

MLSE simply can't risk their franchise value falling below $1 billion.

Mess is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-29-2012, 11:45 AM
  #72
Mess
Global Moderator
 
Mess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 65,497
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACC1224 View Post
Would it be better if they were bad and poor?
Is successful/good & rich not a viable option?

Interesting that you chose the solution of decreasing MLSE wealth as your answer, as opposed to simply suggesting the team needs to get better results to validate the situation, and to merit the returns on investment from a fan perspective.

Mess is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-29-2012, 11:54 AM
  #73
ACC1224
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 32,716
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mess View Post
Is successful/good & rich not a viable option?

Interesting that you chose the solution of decreasing MLSE wealth as your answer, as opposed to simply suggesting the team needs to get better results to validate the situation, and to merit the returns on investment from a fan perspective.
The point is bad is bad. I don't care how much money they have. If they were good and poor I would be just as happy if they were good and rich.

ACC1224 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-29-2012, 12:11 PM
  #74
TheSilencer
Registered User
 
TheSilencer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,814
vCash: 500
Well at least we're winning in something.

TheSilencer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-29-2012, 12:15 PM
  #75
Aplayaz2000
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,331
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSilencer View Post
Well at least we're winning in something.
not just winning

#1

Aplayaz2000 is online now   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 01:23 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.