Bettman “this team used to write a cheque for revenue sharing and for the last years they have received a cheque and its getting bigger.”
This is a good thing and I hate that King and Bettman are trying to spin it as a negative.
We're one of the smallest markets in the league, playing in one of the oldest buildings in the league. We shouldn't be sending money out of Calgary to prop up struggling teams in other larger markets that play in newer arenas.
I don't know what the numbers look like, but if the Flames were previously paying $3 million a year into revenue sharing, and are now receiving $3 million a year from revenue sharing, that's a $6 million swing, and pretty much covers the difference between where the City and CSEC is on the financing agreement.
If the implication is that any team that receives revenue sharing is a struggling market, that means half the teams in the league are struggling because the revenue sharing system is set up for half the teams to receive revenue sharing every season.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to getbak For This Useful Post:
Bettman “this team used to write a cheque for revenue sharing and for the last years they have received a cheque and its getting bigger.”
Yeah that has everything to do with the building being old and not that disposable income has gone down the drain with people losing their jobs, and all the corporate seats, company boxes, and sales guys buying seats to close deals have gone away too.
The Following User Says Thank You to Hack&Lube For This Useful Post:
Bettman “this team used to write a cheque for revenue sharing and for the last years they have received a cheque and its getting bigger.”
Yeah that has everything to do with the building being old and not that disposable income has gone down the drain with people losing their jobs, and all the corporate seats, company boxes, and sales guys buying seats to close deals have gone away too.
Yes....its the arena.
The price of Oil and the Canadian Dollar have absolutely nothing to do with it.
Its the arena. Its the Saddledome's fault.
__________________ The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
The World Ends when you're dead. Until then, you've got more punishment in store. - Flames Fans
If you thought this season would have a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Locke For This Useful Post:
This is a good thing and I hate that King and Bettman are trying to spin it as a negative.
We're one of the smallest markets in the league, playing in one of the oldest buildings in the league. We shouldn't be sending money out of Calgary to prop up struggling teams in other larger markets that play in newer arenas.
I don't know what the numbers look like, but if the Flames were previously paying $3 million a year into revenue sharing, and are now receiving $3 million a year from revenue sharing, that's a $6 million swing, and pretty much covers the difference between where the City and CSEC is on the financing agreement.
If the implication is that any team that receives revenue sharing is a struggling market, that means half the teams in the league are struggling because the revenue sharing system is set up for half the teams to receive revenue sharing every season.
If there is so much more revenue available in a new building, then I guess it should be worth it for the owner's to build one themselves. I'd imagine the flip from revenue sharer to receiver has more to do with the exchange rate than anything.
It really distasteful to hear how Calgary taxpayers should put a bunch of money into a new building so the owners can make more revenue. More revenue means they are getting those same taxpayers to spend more money to enjoy watching the Flames in that new building they paid for.
Let's see how those revenue sharing teams do once the gravy train of cable carriage fees runs dry in the next few years and they have to rely on tv rights based on actual viewers and now how many millions in their DMA pay for a sports channel they no longer watch.
Bettman can't see it, because he's always been incredibly short sighted, but the future of the NHL and other sports are in cities where people actually care about spending time supporting and watching the team.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to nfotiu For This Useful Post:
I think the whole point is that Joe public thinks the team makes money hand over fist and the owners are incredibly greedy. Reality is they make a very modest return year over year. If money was the owners only concern this team would have been sold long ago.
Bettman “this team used to write a cheque for revenue sharing and for the last years they have received a cheque and its getting bigger.”
Yeah that has everything to do with the building being old and not that disposable income has gone down the drain with people losing their jobs, and all the corporate seats, company boxes, and sales guys buying seats to close deals have gone away too.
I think it's just mostly because the team is mediocre.
__________________
If you don't pass this sig to ten of your friends, you will become an Oilers fan.
If there is so much more revenue available in a new building, then I guess it should be worth it for the owner's to build one themselves. I'd imagine the flip from revenue sharer to receiver has more to do with the exchange rate than anything.
It really distasteful to hear how Calgary taxpayers should put a bunch of money into a new building so the owners can make more revenue. More revenue means they are getting those same taxpayers to spend more money to enjoy watching the Flames in that new building they paid for.
Let's see how those revenue sharing teams do once the gravy train of cable carriage fees runs dry in the next few years and they have to rely on tv rights based on actual viewers and now how many millions in their DMA pay for a sports channel they no longer watch.
Bettman can't see it, because he's always been incredibly short sighted, but the future of the NHL and other sports are in cities where people actually care about spending time supporting and watching the team.
Except that lets say that the Flames say we're going to pay for the whole building $200 million bucks.
It would probably take them 30 years to recoup that based on even an profit of lets say 20 million bucks.
Its an over simplification to say, let these owners build the buildings.
In the NFL it makes sense when you see a team realizing a profit of about 350 million bucks like the Cowboys.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Except that lets say that the Flames say we're going to pay for the whole building $200 million bucks.
It would probably take them 30 years to recoup that based on even an profit of lets say 20 million bucks.
Its an over simplification to say, let these owners build the buildings.
In the NFL it makes sense when you see a team realizing a profit of about 350 million bucks like the Cowboys.
I'm guessing you meant to say 600 million?
It's a broken business then. If it's not profitable building a 600 million dollar arena, then it is a bad business decision to build one that is so expensive. That's how other businesses work.
The NHL, led by Bettman had us sit through all these lockouts, and they still didn't come up with a CBA where a team that draws 18,000 a game at fairly hefty prices can't make a profit? They created a CBA where it is only profitable to be one of the 5-6 highest revenue teams, while the middle groups scrapes by with modest profits that count on public financed buildings, and the bottom third mostly lose money every year.
The business of the NHL under Bettman has developed into a mess that counts on trying to bully the cities, fans and players to make up for their mistakes.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to nfotiu For This Useful Post:
I think the whole point is that Joe public thinks the team makes money hand over fist and the owners are incredibly greedy. Reality is they make a very modest return year over year. If money was the owners only concern this team would have been sold long ago.
Revenue sharing isn't an indication of profit or loss.
You can still be profitable and draw from the revenue sharing pool if you're in the bottom 15 teams in terms of revenue. You could be losing money and pay into revenue sharing if you're one of the top 10 teams in terms of revenue.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
What I'm confused about is what Bettman/CSEC are expecting to happen next. They keep saying they are finished and not interesting in talks, but then they keep making these snarky comments about the arena.
What are they hoping for exactly? For the City/fans to come grovelling on their knees or something? It just seems so childish.
The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Table 5 For This Useful Post:
The way the Olympic bid is going, the Flames may not even have a seat at the table.
Flames may not care, and is fine with that and being only tenants in whatever building a built. But then the user fee that they would have to pay probably will be (and should be) high.
