Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
30% was honestly a plug to get the investment back to zero using the Flames offer, and a starting point, and the biggest variable in the model as I had Edmonton to set ticket prices and the ticket surcharge
The franchise value comes down to what I'd do. If I owed the Flames (or a portion) I'd see it as a legacy item for my family that would never be sold and therefore not a true investment figure.
And as I said it's a pretty small year over year change to ponder vs the losses of the investment to build an arena. Even if it went up by 5% a year over the next five years you'd only see the value at an uptick of roughly $85M vs the $285M investment hit to build the thing on their own.
|
Thanks for the response. I get the legacy argument, but even in that scenario who knows what happens as things get passed down. I believe Les Alexander viewed the Houston Rockets as a legacy investment at one point and they were sold for $2.2 billion a few days ago.
To me its a tiebreaker of sorts maybe. Owning a sports team has some great intangible benefits (I would imagine). Breaking even from an investment perspective coupled with these intangibles and appreciation in value would seem like a sweet deal for your average billionaire.