HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
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.

Panther's arena had net income of ~$90mm from 1998-2008

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-17-2012, 01:45 PM
  #101
Dr Beinfest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Orlando, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 961
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMoreYouKnow View Post
South Florida is a place where people live but nobody is from. Too many people there have either no particular interest in U.S. pro sports or loyalty to other teams. Success can cover that up (people love a winner) but there's no culture of hometown loyalism. It's the same issue places like Arizona and L.A. have but much worse.
Hometown loyalism is something that will grow though. Keep in mind, the current age of the franchise matches that of the typical individual who is a sophomore in college. There is a whole new batch of true Floridians being groomed, if you will.

Dr Beinfest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2012, 03:07 PM
  #102
barneyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,203
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holdurbreathe View Post
Though I realize Forbes published financial info may not be 100% accurate, it does provide at least provide some indicators as to the financial health of the league.

According to the latest update, the 30 NHL franchises owe ~$2.7B, the cost of serving this debt prohibitive to achieving profitability for many franchises.

(...)

Its really not hard to understand their thinking when a 30 team league generates net only $250M EBT, or an average of $8.3M EBT per team, while at the same time the have seen double digit growth in their equity.
This is OT regarding this thread but I just want to point out that it's $250M EBITDA not $250M EBT. In other words, once financing costs are taken into account, the league is assuredly in the red as a whole (this is of course subject to the standard disclaimer about the credibility of Forbes figures).

barneyg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-18-2012, 01:49 AM
  #103
flapanthersfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Miami, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 1,855
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gump Hasek View Post
This is a business board.

I repeat; you claimed earlier that "it's all creative accounting. making the panthers a loss leader. it hasn't even been mentioned here that exaggerating the panthers losses also benefits the organization thru NHL revenue sharing." That speaks directly to incredibly unethical behavior on their part if your claim is true. The net result of that behavior is that the players receive less money at the end of the day because their salaries are tied to a percentage of league HRR. Another result is that the franchise would be essentially stealing revenue sharing money from other league partners; of course you are aware of this because you claimed it to be a "benefit". That isn't a benefit, it is theft/fraud.

Apparently it would surprise you to know that many in the business world value ethical behavior quite highly, near above anything else in fact. So, yeah, I think it to be a rather compelling point actually, given that ethical behavior of counter-parties in business is pretty much vital. Then you said "do you really think the nhl and cliff viner are at all interested in how their business model affects the players?". I would hope they would be as theft is always the less preferable option, and especially when your claims speak to the additional stealing of money from other owners as well.
all of what you said is true. but apparently, you haven't been in business if you think everyone values "ethical behavior"

all people care about is their own bottom line. it's a cut-throat world. nothing the panthers are doing is illegal, thus, it is not "theft"

Quote:
Leases are designed to be broken, FYI, there is always an out, so I'm not that impressed with your claim that the lease keeps them tied to that market.

true, but those outs are expensive. and obviously not necessary when you're making money.


Quote:
I won't even address the balance of your post as it amounts to little more than an emotional plea. Emotions hold no sway in business discussions. The bank doesn't care how many games the team won or lost.
you're actually not going to address the balance of the post because you have no argument to counter it. nice try, though.


flapanthersfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-18-2012, 12:33 PM
  #104
Coolburn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: South Florida
Country: Hungary
Posts: 7,697
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Coolburn Send a message via MSN to Coolburn Send a message via Yahoo to Coolburn
I cant remember for certain but I recall at one point that the team is tied to the arena operating company as part of a stipulation of the lease. Only reason I bring this up is because someone mentioned in this thread that the team could be sold & moved as a separate entity from the arena since that makes more money without the team. So the answer to that scenario is no, the team cant be sold individually just for the purpose of moving them. Dont blame the ownership, it was the county that insisted on that as part of the lease IIRC.

Side note, I remember back during the summer that the COO Michael Yormark was going to Vegas. At the same time, everyone assumed it was to meet with Luongo because he was there for the World Series of Poker I believe. Bad assumption because he was doing some negotiating I believe for potentially bringing a casino facility to the nearby area of the arena. It would be built by the SSE and obviously operated on the land associated with the purchase of the team & arena but that will eventually be another revenue stream for the parent company. That should have zero tie to hockey revenues as well because it wouldnt matter since it wouldnt be at the arena itself and would still exist without a hockey team to "anchor" it (largest outlet mall in the world is just across the street from the arena so plenty of visitors will be potential customers).

Second side note, I know for a fact (since I work for him at his day job) that the owner of the Panthers is a big hockey fan. He wants the team to grow and prosper here and knows that it will take a winning team to do that. But he's not gonna spend a ton of money on players until the team is built the right away (via mostly home grown talent). He's being patient but still spending $50M per yr in player salaries so he's not keeping the money to himself or anything (he's above the cap floor consistently). Keep in mind, he's technically the new primary owner as of Nov 2009 (though he's been part of the ownership group since 2002). So the numbers we have are technically from a previous primary owner (who made some pretty poor decisions at times) and kinda hard to judge the org currently based on that. However, if you'd like to read a little about the new owner (Cliff Viner), you can see why there has been optimism in the future of this team (note: Siegel is no longer part of the Panthers so Viner is the sole primary partner)

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/sp...l-take-/nLksQ/

Coolburn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 12:44 PM
  #105
jol
Registered User
 
jol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Miami Beach, Florida
Posts: 1,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coolburn View Post
I cant remember for certain but I recall at one point that the team is tied to the arena operating company as part of a stipulation of the lease. Only reason I bring this up is because someone mentioned in this thread that the team could be sold & moved as a separate entity from the arena since that makes more money without the team. So the answer to that scenario is no, the team cant be sold individually just for the purpose of moving them. Dont blame the ownership, it was the county that insisted on that as part of the lease IIRC.
How easy it would be to convince county to agree on changes in lease? In case if SSE/casino company decides to buy arena (part of $2 billion investment which casino would have to do)

JOL

jol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 02:03 PM
  #106
Coolburn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: South Florida
Country: Hungary
Posts: 7,697
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Coolburn Send a message via MSN to Coolburn Send a message via Yahoo to Coolburn
Quote:
Originally Posted by jol View Post
How easy it would be to convince county to agree on changes in lease? In case if SSE/casino company decides to buy arena (part of $2 billion investment which casino would have to do)

JOL
I dont see why SSE and the casino company would do that and they wouldnt have to either. SSE as part of the purchase of the Panthers included plenty of land nearby & where the arena sits. And SSE has already got the deal with Boyd Gaming to build the casino on that land and its just a matter of the state passing some legislation I believe. But it will be some time before the casino actually breaks ground and is built. The county wouldnt want to change the lease really because the additional revenue generated by a casino would be valuable to them and really, the SSE wouldnt want to change the lease either so it doesnt matter.

If you're at all interested in reading about the deal to build the casino, here's an article from back in July:
http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/201...tlantic-center

Coolburn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 07:26 PM
  #107
Major4Boarding
Global Moderator
Private Equity
 
Major4Boarding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: South of Heaven
Country: Scotland
Posts: 1,764
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coolburn View Post
And SSE has already got the deal with Boyd Gaming to build the casino on that land and its just a matter of the state passing some legislation I believe.
The word on the street is, it'll be another 2 years before any new attempts to introduce (or re-introduce) "Casino Bills" before the Florida Legislature. Even big, bad ol' Genting Group is backing off of their threat of bypassing the Legislature by putting it to ballot thru a petition drive in 2014. Everyone is saying the right things... buzzwords like "further evaluations", "strategic and regulatory environments", "patient approaches", etc.

Translation: Behind the scenes maneuvering by Pro Destination Resort aficionados to block or stall the Seminole Tribe's efforts to extend their Black Jack and Table games clause in the current Gaming Compact past 2015. If the Tribe is successful in doing so (extension before the 2015 sunset), it'll be many more years to come before any of the Pro Destination Resort folks have a decent chance of getting anything before the House or Senate. Guess that Compact WAS worth the paper it was written on after all

That's not even including that the upcoming 2014-16 Senate President designee Gardiner was the lead in killing last session's attempts to cram one thru... who also just happens to be on the newest collective of the FL. Senate Gambling Committee.

Major4Boarding is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 07:28 PM
  #108
barneyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,203
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jol View Post
How easy it would be to convince county to agree on changes in lease? In case if SSE/casino company decides to buy arena (part of $2 billion investment which casino would have to do)

JOL
Annually, SSE's pays ~$4.5 million in rent while the County's debt payments are ~$14.5 million. Why would SSE buy the arena?

barneyg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 07:30 PM
  #109
Major4Boarding
Global Moderator
Private Equity
 
Major4Boarding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: South of Heaven
Country: Scotland
Posts: 1,764
vCash: 500
So in short, if the Panthers and SSE have seemingly any hopes in the next 3 years (at minimum) of a Casino tie-in with Boyd they'll have to put all their efforts jointly in getting Boyd to transfer their PM permit (pari-mutuel) from Dania Jai-Alai. Even that has obstacles at the moment, albeit given all the other circumstances the best chance to see resolution in the near term:

Quote:
DANIA BEACH The proposed mega-expansion of the Dania Jai-Alai fronton is dead but the fight remains alive as two lawsuits wind their way through state court.

In one, potential buyer Dania Entertainment Center LLC is suing The Aragon Group a subsidiary of the fronton's owner, Boyd Gaming over cancellation of the sale agreement.

...

The deal to transform the aging fronton into a casino with a hotel, restaurants, bars, lounges, shops and a marina fell through in November when DEC failed to come up with the financing for the $80 million project.

In a separate lawsuit, DEC recently sought to ask about membership of and contributions to Citizens for Responsible Development, a nonprofit that sued Dania Beach over allowing the project. But Broward Circuit Judge Eileen O'Connor barred such questions from recent depositions.

Meanwhile, Dania Beach is asking the judge to dismiss the case and the citizens' group is asking the judge to void the agreement that would have allowed the development to proceed.

The nonprofit citizens group is represented by high-powered attorney, Bill Scherer, of Conrad & Scherer.

DEC alleges the deal fell through because Boyd did not provide "clear and marketable title," the state failed to approve transfer of the pari-mutuel permit and the Citizens' lawsuit "created doubts" about its ability to proceed and "impaired" its ability to close on the property.
http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/201...gaming-lawsuit

Now, about the $14MM in loans from Broward County to SSE in the past 3+ years...

Major4Boarding is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2012, 03:52 PM
  #110
jol
Registered User
 
jol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Miami Beach, Florida
Posts: 1,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barneyg View Post
Annually, SSE's pays ~$4.5 million in rent while the County's debt payments are ~$14.5 million. Why would SSE buy the arena?
Not SSE alone, they don't have funds to buy, but for casino company it would be part of $2 billion investment.

JOL

jol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2012, 05:11 PM
  #111
barneyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,203
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jol View Post
Not SSE alone, they don't have funds to buy, but for casino company it would be part of $2 billion investment.
You didn't answer the question. SSE is currently shouldering about 30% of the debt load (=construction cost) of the arena, yet they get to pocket 100% of arena operating profits. Why would they want to change this setup?

barneyg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2012, 09:15 AM
  #112
jol
Registered User
 
jol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Miami Beach, Florida
Posts: 1,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barneyg View Post
You didn't answer the question. SSE is currently shouldering about 30% of the debt load (=construction cost) of the arena, yet they get to pocket 100% of arena operating profits. Why would they want to change this setup?
Earlier in thread it was mentioned lease (or leases) can be broken (if SSE/casino company wants to something with Panthers). I don't know how much breaking the lease would cost, but if it's serious amount of money, they might as well buy the arena.

JOL

jol 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 07:02 AM.

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.