Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducay
I don't think the writer of the article understands how business accounting works, most large corporations have huge amounts of debt, but thats how companies work. If companies didn't take out huge amounts of debt, there would hardly be any growth because there wouldn't be any money to finance it.
The NFL and its franchises being such huuuge corporations with billion dollar revenues, this kind of debt isn't much of an issue when you compare it to the amount these clubs are worth. The debt to equity ratio appears pretty small to me in this case.
|
No kidding. I agree with you there and I'm aware of the general leveraged situations of most large companies, but the fact remains that the League
is trying to mandate less held debt per team.
There has to be a reason.
Quote:
Originally Posted by simmer2
http://espn.go.com/sportsbusiness/s/forbes.html
I'm not sure what they are using to base the value of the team on, but this is what Forbes lists the values of Sports teams at. I am pretty sure this implies the number that it would take to purchase a team.
|
This seems weird, or perhaps out of date? I know the Redskins are incredibly valuable, but some of those franchise values seem really low and others are higher than I'd imagine.
As for whether or not those values are equivalent to "price tags" on franchises, I'm not sure.
There are a lot of factors to consider when calculating "value" versus "price" or "cost." One of the major differences including possibility of future cashflows and revenues.
If they are right then Katz up in the Chuck got
fleeced!