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.

Part III. Prospective Owners - Phoenix Coyotes (UPD Lease vote 4/13; IEH signs MOU)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-31-2010, 06:43 PM
  #251
Art.Vandelay
@kash2112
 
Art.Vandelay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Glendale, AZ
Posts: 1,483
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
The lease is only ~$4M a year - that could go to zero and financing would still be an issue. IMO Leblanc is being intentionally misleading - he doesn't need a cheap lease, he needs a subsidy, but doesn't appear willing to state it plainly. At least not publicly.
The lease is not $4mm/year. The rent is $4mm/year. The rent is only a portion of the overall lease. The lease includes things like concessions, parking, arena management.

Nobody is asking COG to reduce the rent. They are asking for a new lease that let's them generate additional revenue.

Quote:
Councilman Phil Lieberman echoed that, saying the city would not forfeit revenue and that any new owner would be obligated to commit to carrying out the remaining 24 years on the lease.
Again, any new lease will not result in any reductions in revenue for COG. It's going to have to create new revenue streams that don't already exist.

Art.Vandelay is offline  
Old
03-31-2010, 06:51 PM
  #252
Free Torts
Registered User
 
Free Torts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,820
vCash: 883
Send a message via MSN to Free Torts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art.Vandelay View Post
Again, any new lease will not result in any reductions in revenue for COG. It's going to have to create new revenue streams that don't already exist.
From where?


Last edited by Free Torts: 03-31-2010 at 07:00 PM.
Free Torts is online now  
Old
03-31-2010, 06:56 PM
  #253
Mayo Taco Monday
Registered User
 
Mayo Taco Monday's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 983
vCash: 510
Send a message via MSN to Mayo Taco Monday
Has anyone actually read the lease? For all we know, the original lease prohibits raising the price of tickets more than 1% per year... As far as I know, the only thing anyone outside of the interested parties knows about the lease is the $4 mil per year rent.

Mayo Taco Monday is online now  
Old
03-31-2010, 07:01 PM
  #254
TheLegend
Megathread Refugee
 
TheLegend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Anxiety Closet
Country: United States
Posts: 3,482
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamilton Tigers View Post
12 News obtained city documents showing the Coyotes had not made lease payments for Glendale-owned Jobing.com Arena for the past seven months. Based on city records of past payments, the bailout could be worth up to $4 million over the course of a year.
http://www.azcentral.com/sports/coyo...sglendale.html

This is over one year ago, so the Coyotes apparently stopped paying rent at the beginning of 2008. The article also speculates that the NHL may have been picking up the tab, so it makes one wonder how much debt the NHL incurred helping the Coyotes even before they bought the team.

When Moyes signed over to allow the NHL to run things, the NHL infused money to the club and some of it went to immediately get lease payments up to date..

That money the NHL put in became part of the secured credit the NHL held in the BK which they got back when they bought the team out of the BK.

TheLegend is offline  
Old
03-31-2010, 07:08 PM
  #255
Art.Vandelay
@kash2112
 
Art.Vandelay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Glendale, AZ
Posts: 1,483
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KJP View Post
From where?
Here is a quote from Leblanc:

Quote:
LeBlanc believes the financially-struggling club can be successful. He cites small changes such as charging for parking, putting a restaurant in the arena and changing marketing tactics as first steps
Parking seems to get mentioned alot. Right now parking is free, but the Coyotes still have to pay COG $2.70 per vehicle resulting in a net loss of $2mm per year. The amount of revenue from parking has been debated here enough, but the net result would be a profit instead of a loss.

Ice Edge also wants to play 5 games a year in Saskatoon. I'm not going to speculate on how much additional revenue it would bring, but it would be an increase.

Art.Vandelay is offline  
Old
03-31-2010, 07:23 PM
  #256
Art.Vandelay
@kash2112
 
Art.Vandelay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Glendale, AZ
Posts: 1,483
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbud View Post
The NHL was out and out playing everyone in this mess they do not care one bit if COG eats up 100s of millions as long as they get the money they want ,and Gb is a nice guy who cares about Pho fans huh.
The NHL and COG could sit down and all work out a way to make it possible but the League has not made this attempt and it seems all those GB /Daly pr spots about keeping hockey in the desert being the issue was pure BS lets hope the fans who have shown up do get some respect they have put the time and money in .
If the NHL comes out the day after the season and says the Coyotes are moving I would not be surprised one bit. If Bettman and co used this whole bankruptcy and "protect the Phoenix fans" as a cover for moving the team where THEY want, I would be pretty bummed not shocked in the least.

The NHL is a business and like any other business people will tell you want you want to hear and then make a run for the money.

Art.Vandelay is offline  
Old
03-31-2010, 07:24 PM
  #257
David_99
Registered User
 
David_99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Moncton, NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,636
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art.Vandelay View Post
Ice Edge also wants to play 5 games a year in Saskatoon. I'm not going to speculate on how much additional revenue it would bring, but it would be an increase.
Not if by game 3, the novelty wears off and the people of Saskatoon stop going. Why would they pay top dollar to finance the Yotes?

David_99 is online now  
Old
03-31-2010, 07:37 PM
  #258
Crazy_Ike
Cookin' with fire.
 
Crazy_Ike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,504
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art.Vandelay View Post
If the NHL comes out the day after the season and says the Coyotes are moving I would not be surprised one bit. If Bettman and co used this whole bankruptcy and "protect the Phoenix fans" as a cover for moving the team where THEY want, I would be pretty bummed not shocked in the least.
The NHL didn't put the team in bankruptcy. But since it was there, they most certainly did make sure that it will work out to the best that THEY can manage. Pretty sound idea to me.

They do want it to stay in Glendale, but - despite the protestations of some - Bettman cannot simply wave a magic wand and make everything all right, and he isn't 'not doing so' out of some kind of malicious spite like some kind of supervillain. The lease has to be viable enough to attract a local owner. If Glendale can't come through with that, the team will move. If they do, the lease will revert back to Moyes and he will be hit with another metric farkton of lawsuits while the NHL takes their franchise somewhere else.

Crazy_Ike is offline  
Old
03-31-2010, 08:16 PM
  #259
Gump Hasek
Spleen Merchant
 
Gump Hasek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: 222 Tudor Terrace
Posts: 7,411
vCash: 1250
Quote:
Originally Posted by cleduc View Post
96/97 to the present doesn't represent what has happened at jobing.com

a) I don't recall seeing paid ticket attendance broken out for jobing.com for all years
b) I don't recall seeing paid ticket attendance for this year.

Nice thought but all I can work with is what I have. As I presume you must have them to express that concern, do you have a link?
Not to speak for the other poster, but here are the long term averages - ex this season, and yes, his 12,068 long term turnstile drop count attendance claim (actual paid tickets) for Phoenix is correct.

http://www.fromtherink.com/2009/6/3/...ndance-figures


Last edited by Gump Hasek: 03-31-2010 at 08:29 PM.
Gump Hasek is offline  
Old
03-31-2010, 08:33 PM
  #260
billy blaze
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,480
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art.Vandelay View Post
If the NHL comes out the day after the season and says the Coyotes are moving I would not be surprised one bit. If Bettman and co used this whole bankruptcy and "protect the Phoenix fans" as a cover for moving the team where THEY want, I would be pretty bummed not shocked in the least.

The NHL is a business and like any other business people will tell you want you want to hear and then make a run for the money.

can't believe I am defending Bettman et al, but they are between a rock and a hard spot- if determined nobody in Phoenix wants the team what can they do? they would have to maximize their return on the investments they made in September and through this year, where to maximize that asset the most would I think we would all agree is S Ontario- specifically Toronto- therein lies the problem- veto schmeto whatever- the Leafs are the strongest franchise in the league and would prefer another alternative, American cities? would need to convince an owner in an American city to pony up considerable cash, why not wait out Atl, Fla possibly NYI in a few years, so what alternatives do they have- it would seem that outside of a S Ontario franchise spun off from present Leaf ownership- the Peg with their deep pocketed owner remains.

billy blaze is offline  
Old
03-31-2010, 08:55 PM
  #261
cleduc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,801
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by David_99 View Post
Not if by game 3, the novelty wears off and the people of Saskatoon stop going. Why would they pay top dollar to finance the Yotes?
So play some games in other cities if Saskatoon doesn't want all of them. Maybe Kansas City would like to see a NHL game. Quebec. Hamilton. Winnipeg. Seattle/Portland if they have a suitable rink. etc.

Yes, I've heard the grumbling that some would not want to see it if it isn't their own team or that Winnipeg only wants their own team. A NHL game is a NHL game. Money is money. If enough fans in a city are willing to pay money to go to go to one NHL game, you have something that might make financial sense and arguably is good for the sport to go to these places that don't get to see it regularly.

I haven't looked at all the details and considerations for a team to try this to know for sure that it makes sense. But the general situation does call for thinking outside of the box. And at the very least, something like this does just that.

"Woe is me. Saskatoon might not want all the games" is hardly a show stopper here.

cleduc is offline  
Old
03-31-2010, 08:57 PM
  #262
RR
Moderator
 
RR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Cave Creek, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 8,058
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art.Vandelay View Post
Here is a quote from Leblanc:



Parking seems to get mentioned alot. Right now parking is free, but the Coyotes still have to pay COG $2.70 per vehicle resulting in a net loss of $2mm per year. The amount of revenue from parking has been debated here enough, but the net result would be a profit instead of a loss.

Ice Edge also wants to play 5 games a year in Saskatoon. I'm not going to speculate on how much additional revenue it would bring, but it would be an increase.
Per ticket, not per vehicle. But you knew that.

RR is offline  
Old
03-31-2010, 09:04 PM
  #263
Hamilton Tigers
Registered User
 
Hamilton Tigers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamilton
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,294
vCash: 500
What gamesmanship!

It almost looks like the CoG doesn't think the NHL has an option to move the team anywhere.

I guess they're not buying the "rumour" of moving to Winnipeg, a small market with an arena that seats only 15,000.

Let's assume Winnipeg was indeed just a ploy. Then what are the NHL's options? Where do they move the team to?

Is there a prospective owner for KC? Where could they go?

Hamilton Tigers is offline  
Old
03-31-2010, 09:07 PM
  #264
billy blaze
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,480
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cleduc View Post
So play some games in other cities if Saskatoon doesn't want all of them. Maybe Kansas City would like to see a NHL game. Quebec. Hamilton. Winnipeg. Seattle/Portland if they have a suitable rink. etc.

Yes, I've heard the grumbling that some would not want to see it if it isn't their own team or that Winnipeg only wants their own team. A NHL game is a NHL game. Money is money. If enough fans in a city are willing to pay money to go to go to one NHL game, you have something that might make financial sense and arguably is good for the sport to go to these places that don't get to see it regularly.

I haven't looked at all the details and considerations for a team to try this to know for sure that it makes sense. But the general situation does call for thinking outside of the box. And at the very least, something like this does just that.

"Woe is me. Saskatoon might not want all the games" is hardly a show stopper here.
I don't think the NHLPA would be to appreciative of your barnstorming team, I'm pretty sure they are already against the Saskatoon idea

billy blaze is offline  
Old
03-31-2010, 09:13 PM
  #265
Hamilton Tigers
Registered User
 
Hamilton Tigers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamilton
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,294
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cleduc View Post
So play some games in other cities if Saskatoon doesn't want all of them. Maybe Kansas City would like to see a NHL game. Quebec. Hamilton. Winnipeg. Seattle/Portland if they have a suitable rink. etc.

Yes, I've heard the grumbling that some would not want to see it if it isn't their own team or that Winnipeg only wants their own team. A NHL game is a NHL game. Money is money. If enough fans in a city are willing to pay money to go to go to one NHL game, you have something that might make financial sense and arguably is good for the sport to go to these places that don't get to see it regularly.

I haven't looked at all the details and considerations for a team to try this to know for sure that it makes sense. But the general situation does call for thinking outside of the box. And at the very least, something like this does just that.

"Woe is me. Saskatoon might not want all the games" is hardly a show stopper here.
Having to play games elsewhere is an admission of failure. I can't see it any other way. I find it to be a ridiculous notion.

Hamilton Tigers is offline  
Old
03-31-2010, 09:15 PM
  #266
cleduc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,801
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art.Vandelay View Post
If the NHL comes out the day after the season and says the Coyotes are moving I would not be surprised one bit. If Bettman and co used this whole bankruptcy and "protect the Phoenix fans" as a cover for moving the team where THEY want, I would be pretty bummed not shocked in the least.

The NHL is a business and like any other business people will tell you want you want to hear and then make a run for the money.
Think about all the NHL has done here.

They financed the team when Moyes defaulted. They financed the team through the bankruptcy.

They worked with Moyes to help him find a buyer. They were working with Reinsdorf and the city to get a deal done the day the bankruptcy was filed. They're still apparently working to that end with Reinsdorf and they have been working with Ice Edge to that end. If the city approves the changes to the lease, there's a very good chance this deal gets done.

Think about the notion that the consent agreement was violated several ways and times over and the NHL could have required it to be cured when it wasn't possible - leading to the legal termination of the franchise as they tried to bring it out of bankruptcy. There were many other paths the NHL could have chosen here other than the one that they did.

No matter how one slices it, the City of Glendale is up to bat and they're a very key decider in the outcome. The City of Glendale has a very decent chance to keep the team if it makes financial sense (it likely does or we wouldn't be where we are today) and they can overcome the political and legal hurdles to do so. I don't see how the City of Glendale would have that chance today if the NHL didn't work towards that end to help them get it.

There is no denying that it was good PR and business for the NHL to back the city. But I think the NHL has been pretty patient with a crazy situation and they had alternatives which weren't as rosy for the city but arguably could have made good financial business sense to the NHL to cut their losses with this mess.

cleduc is offline  
Old
03-31-2010, 09:21 PM
  #267
billy blaze
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,480
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cleduc View Post
Think about all the NHL has done here.

They financed the team when Moyes defaulted. They financed the team through the bankruptcy.

They worked with Moyes to help him find a buyer. They were working with Reinsdorf and the city to get a deal done the day the bankruptcy was filed. They're still apparently working to that end with Reinsdorf and they have been working with Ice Edge to that end. If the city approves the changes to the lease, there's a very good chance this deal gets done.

Think about the notion that the consent agreement was violated several ways and times over and the NHL could have required it to be cured when it wasn't possible - leading to the legal termination of the franchise as they tried to bring it out of bankruptcy. There were many other paths the NHL could have chosen here other than the one that they did.

No matter how one slices it, the City of Glendale is up to bat and they're a very key decider in the outcome. The City of Glendale has a very decent chance to keep the team if it makes financial sense (it likely does or we wouldn't be where we are today) and they can overcome the political and legal hurdles to do so. I don't see how the City of Glendale would have that chance today if the NHL didn't work towards that end to help them get it.
the only other path here was to give team to Balsillie under his terms- no way that was happening,

right now IMHO- the state legislature enacting a special taxing district for MLB and NHL is they only way to save Coyotes for Glendale- thus the feet dragging

and TrueNorth in Winnipeg ensures their won't be any losses for NHL

billy blaze is offline  
Old
03-31-2010, 09:31 PM
  #268
berklon
Registered User
 
berklon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 853
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamilton Tigers View Post
Having to play games elsewhere is an admission of failure. I can't see it any other way. I find it to be a ridiculous notion.
I agree. And thinking that ANY Canadian city would gladly pay top dollar to prop up a team that was originally taken away from this country (and with the NHL bending over backwards to avoid them from going back) is ridiculous.

If the Coyotes are going to play games outside of Arizona to generate extra revenue, they'll have to rely on the games being played in the US or Europe.

berklon is offline  
Old
03-31-2010, 09:31 PM
  #269
cleduc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,801
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamilton Tigers View Post
Having to play games elsewhere is an admission of failure. I can't see it any other way. I find it to be a ridiculous notion.
There is tremendous population growth projected for the Phoneix area. Something like 42% over the next 15 years. Lots of folks from NHL cities/markets going there to retire. If ticket sales grow accordingly without any increase in market penetration, jobing.com is arguably too small.

We could bicker about this or that with those numbers and that general statement but over the next five to ten years, things will substantially improve with this franchise if they ice a decent team periodically - as opposed to what they've done the past number of years with no playoffs.

Even if the team left, it's the number two growing city in the US for the foreseeable future (out decades) and one that cannot be perpetually ignored. The NHL will eventually be coming back.

A visionary might see this as a short term problem that will inevitably get better as time goes along. Saskatoon is a short term solution idea that may be more cost effective than uprooting the team and then trying to break back into the market years later and starting from scratch trying to heal the wounds of ripping the city and it's fans off.

cleduc is offline  
Old
03-31-2010, 09:34 PM
  #270
cleduc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,801
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by billy blaze View Post
the only other path here was to give team to Balsillie under his terms- no way that was happening,
No that was not the only other path but you are welcome to think so.

cleduc is offline  
Old
03-31-2010, 09:54 PM
  #271
billy blaze
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,480
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cleduc View Post
No that was not the only other path but you are welcome to think so.
seems to me if I remember correctly only Balsillie and NHL were in Baum's courtroom

billy blaze is offline  
Old
03-31-2010, 10:01 PM
  #272
WJG
Running and Rioting
 
WJG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Country: Ireland
Posts: 12,760
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamilton Tigers View Post
Having to play games elsewhere is an admission of failure. I can't see it any other way. I find it to be a ridiculous notion.
Agreed 100%.

WJG is online now  
Old
03-31-2010, 10:21 PM
  #273
ATHF
Go Jets Go!
 
ATHF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 826
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by cleduc View Post
So play some games in other cities if Saskatoon doesn't want all of them. Maybe Kansas City would like to see a NHL game. Quebec. Hamilton. Winnipeg. Seattle/Portland if they have a suitable rink. etc.

Yes, I've heard the grumbling that some would not want to see it if it isn't their own team or that Winnipeg only wants their own team. A NHL game is a NHL game. Money is money. If enough fans in a city are willing to pay money to go to go to one NHL game, you have something that might make financial sense and arguably is good for the sport to go to these places that don't get to see it regularly.

I haven't looked at all the details and considerations for a team to try this to know for sure that it makes sense. But the general situation does call for thinking outside of the box. And at the very least, something like this does just that.

"Woe is me. Saskatoon might not want all the games" is hardly a show stopper here.
None of this matters because....

A.) If the city cannot support the team without relying on five out-of-market games to bolster their finances, there is a pretty good chance that the city can't support the team period.

B.) Saskatoon, Hamilton, Seattle, Mars, it doesn't matter where they want to play those games, the lease won't allow wiggle room to have them play games elsewhere and even if it did, the BOG would never allow it.

C.) If, and it's a big if, all five out-of-market games sold out wherever they were being held, that would produce in the neighborhood of $5 million in revenue, give or take some. When you realize that the team is losing $20 million or more per season, that's only a quarter of the problem solved. That's also not taking into account that that is 5 million, minus whatever revenue the games would have brought in had they been held in Phoenix. So if the five games would have grossed 1 million or 1.5 million, that means that there would only be a net gain of 3.5 or 4 million, which puts them even further from break-even.

IEH has been nothing but a two-bit amateur hour operation from the day they announced their intentions in trying to buy the Coyotes and even if they are able to scrabble together the money to buy the team to begin with, I am still incredibly doubtful that they would even have the capital left to keep the team afloat for three or four years worth of heavy losses before they're right back in the same scenario.

There is no way that this works without heavy subsidizing from the city. The gap is far too wide to be bridged with any kind of "alternative revenue streams", no matter how many of them are tried.

ATHF is online now  
Old
03-31-2010, 10:36 PM
  #274
Hamilton Tigers
Registered User
 
Hamilton Tigers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamilton
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,294
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cleduc View Post
Saskatoon is a short term solution idea that may be more cost ffective than uprooting the team and then trying to break back into the market years later and starting from scratch trying to heal the wounds of ripping the city and it's fans off.
Huh?

Coyotes losing hundreds of millions of dollars in over a dozen years, with the last year averaging only 11,000 fans and with the NHL trying for almost two years to find a buyer and no one stepping up, running the team themselves for Phoenix and its fans for over a season and they're ripping off the city and it's fans?

Hamilton Tigers is offline  
Old
03-31-2010, 10:55 PM
  #275
cleduc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,801
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ATHF View Post
None of this matters because....

A.) If the city cannot support the team without relying on five out-of-market games to bolster their finances, there is a pretty good chance that the city can't support the team period.
That assumes a static situation where nothing changes. The projected growth in that area is substantial and will improve that teams fortunes over time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ATHF View Post
B.) Saskatoon, Hamilton, Seattle, Mars, it doesn't matter where they want to play those games, the lease won't allow wiggle room to have them play games elsewhere and even if it did, the BOG would never allow it.
The NHL Bog approved such a thing in the early 90s and games were played in non-NHL cities. If it helps to solve the problems in Phoenix, I don't know why they wouldn't give it serious consideration. It certainly didn't mess them up in the early 90s.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ATHF View Post
C.) If, and it's a big if, all five out-of-market games sold out wherever they were being held, that would produce in the neighborhood of $5 million in revenue, give or take some. When you realize that the team is losing $20 million or more per season, that's only a quarter of the problem solved. That's also not taking into account that that is 5 million, minus whatever revenue the games would have brought in had they been held in Phoenix. So if the five games would have grossed 1 million or 1.5 million, that means that there would only be a net gain of 3.5 or 4 million, which puts them even further from break-even.
$20 mil is a one off number that includes about $7 mil in damages due to the bankruptcy. All of a sudden, we're down to $13 mil when the market returns to as it was before the bankruptcy.

A net gain of $3.5 or $4 mil is a net gain (if that is what the net gain is). Nobody said that the games played elsewhere had to solve the entire problem. All of a sudden we're down to $9-9.5 mil to figure out. Why do you think they're in discussions about the lease?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ATHF View Post
There is no way that this works without heavy subsidizing from the city. The gap is far too wide to be bridged with any kind of "alternative revenue streams", no matter how many of them are tried.
If the cost of 'heavy subsidizing' is significantly less than the cost of losing the team altogether and it was your bank account, which way would you go?

cleduc is offline  
Closed Thread

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 05:38 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.