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, NHL revenues, relocation and expansion.

Tons of NBA Financial Data to Compare to NHL (and NHL looks pretty good)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-08-2009, 10:29 PM
  #1
GSC2k2*
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,384
vCash: 500
Tons of NBA Financial Data to Compare to NHL (and NHL looks pretty good)

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/11934840

Quote:
Regular-season gate receipts -- the money generated by individual ticket sales and all forms of season-ticket plans -- declined $2.66 million league-wide in 2008-09. That's a minuscule 0.2 percent in a business that generated $1.1 billion in gate revenue the previous season.
Quote:
Fifteen teams suffered declines in gate receipts last season, the worst being the New Jersey Nets, whose ticket revenue declined $11.4 million, a 29 percent drop from 2007-08.
Quote:
It's easy to understand why if you examine Milwaukee's $3.6 million decline in gate receipts last season, a drop of nearly 18 percent, according to the figures obtained by CBSSports.com. The Bucks were one of only five teams in the league to generate less than $500,000 in gate receipts per home game, according to the data. The Pacers, Hawks, Timberwolves and Grizzlies were the others. Only the Hawks made the playoffs.
Quote:
After the Nets, the next hardest-hit team was Sacramento, whose gate receipts declined $9.7 million, or 23 percent, in 2008-09.
Quote:
Other teams sustaining massive declines at the gate were the Raptors ($9.1 million), Pistons ($7.7 million), Clippers ($6.8 million) and Heat ($5.3 million). The Wizards, Bobcats and Pacers each went down more than $4 million.
I would assume part of the Raptor decline was due to an unfavourable exchange rate that declined ~10%.

The only real bright light was in Oklahoma City, where the move to a new locale resulted in increased gate revenues of $27.2 million (!), an increase of 145%.


Other bits:

- The NBA claimed 90.4% capacity, but actual attendance was 73% (14,072 per game).

- The teams with the lowest actual attendance last year were Memphis (7,570 per game), Minnesota (8,969), Charlotte (9,404), Indiana (10,057), Sacramento (10,188), Milwaukee (10,884) and Washington (11,030).

- Three teams comped an average of more than 5,000 free tickets per game last season: the Hawks (5,616), Nets (5,213) and Timberwolves (5,205). This puts the NHL gate comp numbers from a few years ago in a bit of a new light, IMO.


- The Pistons lost their streak of 259 straight sellouts. They recorded actual attendance of only 77 percent capacity (16,957).

- Miami, with superduperstar Dwyane Wade leading them to the playoffs, had actual attendance of 13,578 (70%).

- Ok City, one of only 12 teams generating more than $1 million in gate receipts per home date, averaged only 14,415 (75%).

GSC2k2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2009, 10:33 PM
  #2
guyincognito
Registered User
 
guyincognito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 31,300
vCash: 500
I can't even imagine what the Nets' gate was, then. a $11M drop translates to a loss of $250K a night. how much could they possibly have been drawing a night before hand? their gate must be pre Wirtz's death Blackhawks ugly. maybe even worse.

actual attendance is a little iffy, though, because of weekdays and no-shows and such.

edit: never mind, they have to have drawn more than $500K a night. I'm calling BS on that, and BS on that they were doing $800K a night in business before then.

guyincognito is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2009, 01:21 AM
  #3
mouser
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
 
mouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 12,958
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GSC2k2 View Post
- Three teams comped an average of more than 5,000 free tickets per game last season: the Hawks (5,616), Nets (5,213) and Timberwolves (5,205). This puts the NHL gate comp numbers from a few years ago in a bit of a new light, IMO.
Reading through that, an interesting question occurred to me: the NHL revenue sharing threshold rules require actual ticket sold levels of 14k. The few published ticket sales/comp numbers we've seen suggest the lower revenue NHL teams have substantially reduced comp tickets the past couple seasons from around 3k for many teams to around 1k in cases.

Is a growing market/lower revenue team better off with:
A) 13k in ticket sales and ~3k in comps that may turn into buyers, or
B) 13.5k-14k in ticket sales and ~1k in comps?


The revenue sharing rules clearly say (B) is preferable. If I were trying to grow a team in a newer market perhaps (A) makes more sense in the longer term though?

mouser is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2009, 01:35 AM
  #4
Darius Dangleaitis
Padowan Kovalchuk
 
Darius Dangleaitis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Morristown, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 20,828
vCash: 500
Not surprising about the Nets. No one, and I mean no one, gives a rat's **** bag about them in Jersey.

Darius Dangleaitis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2009, 03:16 AM
  #5
MAROONSRoad
f/k/a Ghost
 
MAROONSRoad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Maroons Rd.
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,069
vCash: 500
Interesting data. What I would like to see is NBA central/head office TV revenue per team. Do you have such data?

Thanks,

GHOST

MAROONSRoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2009, 04:56 AM
  #6
AlexandreBurrows
Registered User
 
AlexandreBurrows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,735
vCash: 500
BLLLEAaaaaAHHHHHHH. Vancouver Grizz was getting more than that when we moved. if the team was still around they;d be doing awesome, vancovuer experienced quite a boom in the mid 2000s

AlexandreBurrows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2009, 06:26 AM
  #7
GSC2k2*
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,384
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GHOSTofMAROONSroad View Post
Interesting data. What I would like to see is NBA central/head office TV revenue per team. Do you have such data?

Thanks,

GHOST
I believe the article mentioned the deal is 8 yrs @ $7.4 billion, so that would put it at $925 million per year, or ~$31 million per team per year.

GSC2k2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2009, 09:38 AM
  #8
Enstrom39
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,174
vCash: 500
I found it surprising that the NBA and NHL cap ceiling are nearly identical--given the difference in money generated from TV.

IIRC the players in the NBA get a smaller % of revenue than do NHLPA.

Enstrom39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2009, 09:43 AM
  #9
X8oD
Registered User
 
X8oD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: 612 Warf Ave.
Country: United States
Posts: 7,294
vCash: 500
The Pistons drew horribly this year, and these numbers back it up.

Yet anybody who wants their 5 minutes of fame points to them and say "They are selling out, why can't the Red Wings?"

They didn't sell out. They lost a ton of money, and now they are in a transition/rebuild phase. They wont sell out a single game this season.

X8oD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2009, 10:37 AM
  #10
Bad Will Hunting
It's my fault
 
Bad Will Hunting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Southie
Posts: 26,578
vCash: 69
You guys are forgetting that the NBA is a huge draw on TV.

Basketball and Football make far more money from TV than the gate

Quote:

Walt Disney Co.'s ABC and ESPN and Time Warner Inc.'s TNT agreed Wednesday to pay the National Basketball Assn. $7.4 billion over eight years for rights to televise its games and, in one of the first deals of its kind, stream action on the Internet and mobile devices.

The deal, which begins in 2008 and runs through the 2015-16 season, works out to an average of about $930 million a year. That's a 22% increase over the $765-million average under the current agreement, industry sources said.


Last edited by Bad Will Hunting: 07-09-2009 at 10:46 AM.
Bad Will Hunting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2009, 10:40 AM
  #11
Fugu
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Bunny Foo Foo View Post
You guys are forgetting that the NBA is a huge draw on TV.
Who could forget that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GSC2k2 View Post
I believe the article mentioned the deal is 8 yrs @ $7.4 billion, so that would put it at $925 million per year, or ~$31 million per team per year.
Thus, NBA teams get as much - or more - money from their TV contract than several NHL teams get in gate receipts. That's a nice little buffer against economic downturns.

  Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2009, 11:07 AM
  #12
Bad Will Hunting
It's my fault
 
Bad Will Hunting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Southie
Posts: 26,578
vCash: 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post

Thus, NBA teams get as much - or more - money from their TV contract than several NHL teams get in gate receipts. That's a nice little buffer against economic downturns.
I bet the NBA is really glad they are only a couple of years into an 8 year TV deal. The timing couldn't have been better.

Bad Will Hunting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2009, 12:02 PM
  #13
GSC2k2*
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,384
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Who could forget that?



Thus, NBA teams get as much - or more - money from their TV contract than several NHL teams get in gate receipts. That's a nice little buffer against economic downturns.
NBA teams get as much - or more - money from their TV contract than they themselves get in gate receipts.

GSC2k2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2009, 12:23 PM
  #14
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Falconer View Post
I found it surprising that the NBA and NHL cap ceiling are nearly identical--given the difference in money generated from TV.
They aren't, really, as the NBA has all kinds of legal cap exceptions. It's a soft cap with a luxury tax. The exceptions/loopholes are so big that there was recently at least one team spending nearly triple the official cap number. Last season nearly a third of the league was $10M or more over the official cap number. The Celtics, for example, are over the official cap with just three (3!) players - they can't even field a starting lineup under the cap, lol.

  Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2009, 02:45 PM
  #15
King_Stannis
Registered User
 
King_Stannis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Erie PA, USA
Country: United States
Posts: 918
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
They aren't, really, as the NBA has all kinds of legal cap exceptions. It's a soft cap with a luxury tax. The exceptions/loopholes are so big that there was recently at least one team spending nearly triple the official cap number. Last season nearly a third of the league was $10M or more over the official cap number. The Celtics, for example, are over the official cap with just three (3!) players - they can't even field a starting lineup under the cap, lol.
And this is why, competition wise, the NBA is suffering a bit I think. I'd wager a full 1/3 of the league has zero chance when starting the season. It's almost like the Royals and Pirates in baseball.

King_Stannis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2009, 02:52 PM
  #16
AngryBoss
Registered User
 
AngryBoss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 695
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexandreBurrows View Post
BLLLEAaaaaAHHHHHHH. Vancouver Grizz was getting more than that when we moved. if the team was still around they;d be doing awesome, vancovuer experienced quite a boom in the mid 2000s
David Stern has admitted it's his biggest regret as NBA commissioner.

AngryBoss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2009, 02:58 PM
  #17
BadHammy*
MSL For Hart!
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Right Behind Me!
Posts: 10,444
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by King_Stannis View Post
And this is why, competition wise, the NBA is suffering a bit I think. I'd wager a full 1/3 of the league has zero chance when starting the season. It's almost like the Royals and Pirates in baseball.
It's part of why I barely care about the NBA. Another thing I noticed is a lot of people who talk about basketball don't go to games and don't even buy the merchandise. I'm not at all surprised the NBA is having trouble. I hope they have to retract a few teams

BadHammy* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2009, 03:00 PM
  #18
Fugu
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by GSC2k2 View Post
NBA teams get as much - or more - money from their TV contract than they themselves get in gate receipts.
With that kind of popularity, why would someone give them such a huge TV deal?

  Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2009, 03:33 PM
  #19
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 13,138
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
They aren't, really, as the NBA has all kinds of legal cap exceptions. It's a soft cap with a luxury tax. The exceptions/loopholes are so big that there was recently at least one team spending nearly triple the official cap number. Last season nearly a third of the league was $10M or more over the official cap number. The Celtics, for example, are over the official cap with just three (3!) players - they can't even field a starting lineup under the cap, lol.
The NBA's soft cap is based on 51% of BRI (Basketball Related Income) - the NBA's version of HRR.

With the slew of exeptions - "Larry Bird Rule","Mid Level Salary Exception","Rookie Exeption", etc - virtually every team is over the cap.

There is a luxury tax with a threshold based on 61% of BRI - any team exceeding that pays a dollar-for-dollar tax.

There is a league wide hard ceiling w/ escrow set at 57% of BRI.

kdb209 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2009, 10:19 PM
  #20
GSC2k2*
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,384
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
With that kind of popularity, why would someone give them such a huge TV deal?
Is that a serious question?

GSC2k2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2009, 10:24 PM
  #21
Fugu
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by GSC2k2 View Post
Is that a serious question?
Sorry, forgot the .

What's your point here, GC? I think it was previously established that the NHL slightly outpaced the NBA in gate receipts and related revenues. The differentiating factor has always been the national media rights contract, plus national and international merchandising that the NBA has-- and the NHL does not, no matter how much credit you want to give Bettman for his amazing $80-90 MM US deal....

Are you suggesting that the NHL is overtaking the NBA since the repercussions of the recession have not yet been felt, and/or may not be felt?

  Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2009, 10:35 PM
  #22
Brodie
pretty on fleek
 
Brodie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Michigan
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 13,243
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexandreBurrows View Post
BLLLEAaaaaAHHHHHHH. Vancouver Grizz was getting more than that when we moved. if the team was still around they;d be doing awesome, vancovuer experienced quite a boom in the mid 2000s
With extra interest from Seattle, they could be doing great right now.

Brodie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2009, 07:31 AM
  #23
GSC2k2*
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,384
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Sorry, forgot the .

What's your point here, GC? I think it was previously established that the NHL slightly outpaced the NBA in gate receipts and related revenues. The differentiating factor has always been the national media rights contract, plus national and international merchandising that the NBA has-- and the NHL does not, no matter how much credit you want to give Bettman for his amazing $80-90 MM US deal....

Are you suggesting that the NHL is overtaking the NBA since the repercussions of the recession have not yet been felt, and/or may not be felt?
No, i was really just noting that we now have a number of actual hard numbers (the raw meat of this Board) to compare, as opposed to "well, we all know".

It also brings some much-needed context to the "actual attendance" vs "real attendance" debate.

GSC2k2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2009, 07:43 AM
  #24
Proboscis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 210
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GSC2k2 View Post
Is that a serious question?
Assume that it is a serious question. What is your answer to it?

Proboscis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2009, 08:52 AM
  #25
Jonas1235
Registered User
 
Jonas1235's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,518
vCash: 500
There's three teams running the league right now. Lakers, Cavaliers and Celtics. They are the only reason why the league isn't in worse shape than it already is. They have too many teams that nobody cares about nationally.

The NHL had this problem earlier this decade. But luckily for the NHL, half the league has large fan bases now and buy lots of merchandise and tickets in various cities.

Jonas1235 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 07:13 PM.

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.