Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community - View Single Post

Resolute 14 · 06-28-2012, 10:03 AM

No, I am saying that revenue disparity is bad. Moving revenues up overall is good for everybody - and it is why I expect the Isles and Coyotes are ultimately going to relocate. It wouldn't be an issue if everyone was growing at similar rates, but they aren't, and that is creating issues.

Consider Forbes' 2006 estimates: http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/31/...s_Revenue.html

Toronto at $119 million in revenue, Flames at $68 million, Phoenix at $63 million, Islanders at $56 million. Then consider 2011 estimates: Toronto $193 million, Flames $105 million, Phoenix $70 million, Islanders $63 million.

So that is a 62% growth for Toronto and 54% for Calgary. But for Phoenix, it is only 11%, and the Islanders 13%. Now, these are good case vs worst case. But for teams like Colorado and Dallas, who's revenues are flat over that time (in fact, The Isles and Coyotes are growing revenue at a higher rate), their spending power has eroded considerably.

As far as making zero business sense goes, I would agree with you if this was a normal business scenario. But the 30 teams are all interlinked, and as such, significant outliers impact everybody. In the case of spending ability and the salary cap, it is the outliers at the top that are disastrous. The league needs to find a way to ensure all teams are growing at a more aligned rate, which is where revenue sharing comes in.

06-28-2012, 10:03 AM	#1387
Resolute 14 In the Sin Bin Join Date: Jan 2003 Exp:	No, I am saying that revenue disparity is bad. Moving revenues up overall is good for everybody - and it is why I expect the Isles and Coyotes are ultimately going to relocate. It wouldn't be an issue if everyone was growing at similar rates, but they aren't, and that is creating issues. Consider Forbes' 2006 estimates: http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/31/...s_Revenue.html Toronto at $119 million in revenue, Flames at $68 million, Phoenix at $63 million, Islanders at $56 million. Then consider 2011 estimates: Toronto $193 million, Flames $105 million, Phoenix $70 million, Islanders $63 million. So that is a 62% growth for Toronto and 54% for Calgary. But for Phoenix, it is only 11%, and the Islanders 13%. Now, these are good case vs worst case. But for teams like Colorado and Dallas, who's revenues are flat over that time (in fact, The Isles and Coyotes are growing revenue at a higher rate), their spending power has eroded considerably. As far as making zero business sense goes, I would agree with you if this was a normal business scenario. But the 30 teams are all interlinked, and as such, significant outliers impact everybody. In the case of spending ability and the salary cap, it is the outliers at the top that are disastrous. The league needs to find a way to ensure all teams are growing at a more aligned rate, which is where revenue sharing comes in.