It wouldn't surprise me too much. Owners don't like to lose money... That and they were recently looking for part-owners to reduce the costs. We are still a long way away from being sold though, if that is their choice going forward. Though, I don't think they sell anytime soon or are actually considering it at the moment.
__________________
"It has not been a good day. I lost my glasses early this morning and I had to go buy a pair of 79 dollar reading glasses today. 79 bucks. You can literally get them at Costco, three-for-20." - Darryl Sutter's response to going up 2-0 in the series.
With the direction the Kings are going....now is the time to sell high.
Pretty much, if they were going to sell, now is precisely the time. That is probably why I disregard the article most of all. They aren't going to be selling us anytime immediate.
Tim Leiweke said the organization lost more money than ever this season. The question is why? The building was fuller than it has been in a couple of seasons and we did get some playoff revenue this year. I understand that payroll is high (and will probably get higher next season) but where is the money gushing?
Tim Leiweke said the organization lost more money than ever this season. The question is why? The building was fuller than it has been in a couple of seasons and we did get some playoff revenue this year. I understand that payroll is high (and will probably get higher next season) but where is the money gushing?
This is why the NHL should take a look on who is buing a franchise.
As long as the owner isn't interested in hockey and just see the financhial
aspects
as long they will have trouble with moving franchises and a decreasing crowd
and franchise stuff.
Anschutz was just a fast fix and everyone knew he doesn't care about hockey.
It should be the intension of any owner to have a team to win the cup
not to squeeze out a couple of cents.
I don't see any sense in keeping franchises in the U.S. when hungry owners in
Canada waiting for a franchise but don't get any chance to get one.
Tim Leiweke said the organization lost more money than ever this season. The question is why? The building was fuller than it has been in a couple of seasons and we did get some playoff revenue this year. I understand that payroll is high (and will probably get higher next season) but where is the money gushing?
This not a matter of sold building.
The most money comes from TV contracts, the NHL and
the franchise goods.
So, the people in a crisis doesn't buy hockey shirts or hats,
the tv contract brought in less money.
That makes a big fat minus on the accounts.
Just calculate.... the Staples has around 1800-1900 seats.
i'm pretty sure the average price for a seat is around 50 $.
42 home games makes
37.800.000 $ when every night sold out.
Taxes not included what lowers this money.
i'm pretty sure the shops bring in another 5 mill $ a year.
let's say 42 Mill $ per year before taxes.
The TV contracts should be around 10 Mill per team + Playoff
that means around 45-50 Mill fix income.
So everything depends now on comercial and franchise goods.
That is how it works.
A couple more attendands per game just mean a value of 100k's
so it doesn't really matter for the big picture
This not a matter of sold building.
The most money comes from TV contracts, the NHL and
the franchise goods.
So, the people in a crisis doesn't buy hockey shirts or hats,
the tv contract brought in less money.
That makes a big fat minus on the accounts.
Just calculate.... the Staples has around 1800-1900 seats.
i'm pretty sure the average price for a seat is around 50 $.
42 home games makes
37.800.000 $ when every night sold out.
Taxes not included what lowers this money.
i'm pretty sure the shops bring in another 5 mill $ a year.
let's say 42 Mill $ per year before taxes.
The TV contracts should be around 10 Mill per team + Playoff
that means around 45-50 Mill fix income.
So everything depends now on comercial and franchise goods.
That is how it works.
A couple more attendands per game just mean a value of 100k's
so it doesn't really matter for the big picture
Um... you notice Rich Hammond working for the Kings?
Notice the much higher amount of content on Kings Vision?
Notice all the advertising and give-aways that were more/higher this year?
Notice the payroll.
These things cost money. Lots of money.
Its not surprising to me that they lost more this year than the past several years.
Hammond's salary is a non-factor. Kings Vision is a staff of three who are probably all salaried. They're producing more content and they're working harder.
I didn't notice any more advertising this year than last year.
Sure, the payroll is high. It could get even higher next season.
At the end of the day, the Kings help keep Staples busy at least 41 days a year. This, in turn, keeps LA Live busy. Anshutz is making money from his team in one way or another.
At the end of the day, the Kings help keep Staples busy at least 41 days a year. This, in turn, keeps LA Live busy. Anshutz is making money from his team in one way or another.
Well yeah. That's why I'm not worried about him selling the team. Owning the team has nothing to do with making money from the team. Its all about LA Live and downtown.
As for the rest of the point, they are all factors. Hammond's salary probably isn't very large, but its something they weren't paying for last year.
I did notice the Kings doing a lot more this year. I know Kings Vision is only a small group of people, but editors don't like to work on salary unless that is one big salary. My guess is he is making some OT, as well as his assistants. Especially if the editor is the guild, then I believe he can't be paid on salary and must make overtime, which it seems he works a ton of... lowest allowable pay for a union editor is $40 per hour.
I also believe the on-ice projection was new to this season. I guarantee that costs a bunch of money. Projection systems that large cost a crap load, as well as the installation, tests, maintenance, etc.
The point is that costs are everywhere, and a few extra sell-outs and tickets sold, even along with 3 home playoff games, aren't going to off-set those costs. Obviously the higher payroll is a big factor as well. Paying Kopitar 6 million more this year, paying Smyth 5 or 6 or something, and adding Scuderi. That's a big chunk of change.
I bet hockeyfest cost a ******** as well. That was a new cost as well.
Once again, my only point is that it doesn't surprise me the Kings lost more money this year than before. The team's success doesn't pay off the year they have said success, it pays off the following year.
Its like if the Kings win a cup next year in the 2010-2011 season, AEG won't see the financial benefits of that until the 2011-2012 season.
There is also the matter of winning having very little to do with profit in sports.
This not a matter of sold building.
The most money comes from TV contracts, the NHL and
the franchise goods.
So, the people in a crisis doesn't buy hockey shirts or hats,
the tv contract brought in less money.
That makes a big fat minus on the accounts.
Just calculate.... the Staples has around 1800-1900 seats.
i'm pretty sure the average price for a seat is around 50 $.
42 home games makes
37.800.000 $ when every night sold out.
Taxes not included what lowers this money.
i'm pretty sure the shops bring in another 5 mill $ a year.
let's say 42 Mill $ per year before taxes.
The TV contracts should be around 10 Mill per team + Playoff
that means around 45-50 Mill fix income.
So everything depends now on comercial and franchise goods.
That is how it works.
A couple more attendands per game just mean a value of 100k's
so it doesn't really matter for the big picture
You are also forgetting concessions which they are getting probably around a 1000% mark up on. They also have luxury boxes which bring in quite a bit of revenue as well (I think these go for $300k year round). $50 is a conservative ticket average when you consider the cheapest tickets in the place are $29. The season ticket holder break on those I think is $25. There are <1000 diehards (probably way less).
Then you tie that into the fact that Staples is the anchor of their new entertainment complex, they are getting their return on investment.
I also completely disagree with people saying now is the time to sell. They just went through 3 seasons of very poor attendance and now they finally have a team that is starting to get attention. That would be like buying a car 3 years ago, putting a highpowered engine in it and then deciding to sell it because you now have to buy the expensive gas. Sorry for the car analogy, I know nothing about them. The time to sell would have been a few years ago or in a few years if the team manages some postseason success.
Ken Campbell is not a credible source re: AEG to my knowledge.
Leiweke on this subject a few weeks ago:
Question: I would like to get Leiweke’s comments on the partial sale of the team [to the ownership group of the Boston Celtics] that fell through and what, if any, discussion there has been since that point about selling part of the team.
LEIWEKE: “That was someone who approached us. We weren’t looking, nor are we now. I’m not sure if that was ever really that serious. We’re blessed. We don’t need to sell any of the team. We don’t need help on financing the team. Phil doesn’t, at this point, need money, so we’re not out actively looking to sell the team. We get calls…I wouldn’t say all the time, but I’ve had a half-dozen calls in the last few months. We’re willing to talk to people, but what we’re not interested in is bringing in someone who wants to own a small piece and be a superfan. That doesn’t work well within partnerships. Phil’s wife would kill him if he sold the team. Nancy would probably hang him out to dry, because she’s the biggest fan out there. Phil is proud of the team. We’re obviously doing well. You look at the future, and you get pretty excited because of the kids coming. Now, that said, if we found the right partner, would we sell a piece of the team? Yeah, but again, I hear people say, `Would AEG ever sell the team?’ I tend to disagree with them, out of respect.
We’re not going to sell to anyone who disrupts us from our philosophy on where we want to go, toward winning a Stanley Cup here. If anyone does come in, it won’t be because we need to bring anyone on. We don’t need money and we don’t need people to cover losses. Unfortunately, we can cover the losses. That said, if it helped and it made us a better organization and if it was a local owner, someone who cared about hockey, we would never say no. We would always entertain that conversation. We’re just currently not in a position where there is a need to have that conversation.’’
Ken Campbell is not a credible source re: AEG to my knowledge.
Leiweke on this subject a few weeks ago:
Question: I would like to get Leiweke’s comments on the partial sale of the team [to the ownership group of the Boston Celtics] that fell through and what, if any, discussion there has been since that point about selling part of the team.
LEIWEKE: “That was someone who approached us. We weren’t looking, nor are we now. I’m not sure if that was ever really that serious. We’re blessed. We don’t need to sell any of the team. We don’t need help on financing the team. Phil doesn’t, at this point, need money, so we’re not out actively looking to sell the team. We get calls…I wouldn’t say all the time, but I’ve had a half-dozen calls in the last few months. We’re willing to talk to people, but what we’re not interested in is bringing in someone who wants to own a small piece and be a superfan. That doesn’t work well within partnerships. Phil’s wife would kill him if he sold the team. Nancy would probably hang him out to dry, because she’s the biggest fan out there. Phil is proud of the team. We’re obviously doing well. You look at the future, and you get pretty excited because of the kids coming. Now, that said, if we found the right partner, would we sell a piece of the team? Yeah, but again, I hear people say, `Would AEG ever sell the team?’ I tend to disagree with them, out of respect.
We’re not going to sell to anyone who disrupts us from our philosophy on where we want to go, toward winning a Stanley Cup here. If anyone does come in, it won’t be because we need to bring anyone on. We don’t need money and we don’t need people to cover losses. Unfortunately, we can cover the losses. That said, if it helped and it made us a better organization and if it was a local owner, someone who cared about hockey, we would never say no. We would always entertain that conversation. We’re just currently not in a position where there is a need to have that conversation.’’
Piston, please pick up the white courtesy phone. Piston, the white courtesy phone please...
Yes indeed.
But I would bet it has something to do with GAAP (Generally Accepted Accoutting Principles) in which taking money from one pocket in your pants and placing it another is counted as a loss.
You are also forgetting concessions which they are getting probably around a 1000% mark up on. They also have luxury boxes which bring in quite a bit of revenue as well (I think these go for $300k year round). $50 is a conservative ticket average when you consider the cheapest tickets in the place are $29. The season ticket holder break on those I think is $25. There are <1000 diehards (probably way less).
Ken Campbell is not a credible source re: AEG to my knowledge.
Leiweke on this subject a few weeks ago:
Question: I would like to get Leiweke’s comments on the partial sale of the team [to the ownership group of the Boston Celtics] that fell through and what, if any, discussion there has been since that point about selling part of the team.
LEIWEKE: “That was someone who approached us. We weren’t looking, nor are we now. I’m not sure if that was ever really that serious. We’re blessed. We don’t need to sell any of the team. We don’t need help on financing the team. Phil doesn’t, at this point, need money, so we’re not out actively looking to sell the team. We get calls…I wouldn’t say all the time, but I’ve had a half-dozen calls in the last few months. We’re willing to talk to people, but what we’re not interested in is bringing in someone who wants to own a small piece and be a superfan. That doesn’t work well within partnerships. Phil’s wife would kill him if he sold the team. Nancy would probably hang him out to dry, because she’s the biggest fan out there. Phil is proud of the team. We’re obviously doing well. You look at the future, and you get pretty excited because of the kids coming. Now, that said, if we found the right partner, would we sell a piece of the team? Yeah, but again, I hear people say, `Would AEG ever sell the team?’ I tend to disagree with them, out of respect.
We’re not going to sell to anyone who disrupts us from our philosophy on where we want to go, toward winning a Stanley Cup here. If anyone does come in, it won’t be because we need to bring anyone on. We don’t need money and we don’t need people to cover losses. Unfortunately, we can cover the losses. That said, if it helped and it made us a better organization and if it was a local owner, someone who cared about hockey, we would never say no. We would always entertain that conversation. We’re just currently not in a position where there is a need to have that conversation.’’
