[News] Oilers Charity scam?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Rutuu

You're right. That is a key distinction, so I retract my statement to rephrase.

I was completely unaware that you could run a 50/50 in this fashion, as I always thought they were allowed because 50% went to some charity or cause, and the other 50% went to the payout. The fact that the 50% for the cause isn't treated as a donation is mind bottling, but I believe you. And also know you are just letting us know the facts, without taking a position, which I appreciate.

Any tickets I've ever bought for a 50/50 (or meat raffles here in Aus...so good) were for the cause / kids / nice volunteers running it. Changing the branding of 50/50's to let people know that the money was just filling Katz's pockets would surely clip the figures.

Are the casino partnerships that are run classified in the same way?

I'd imagine casinos take a large chunk off the top. That said, they have a lot of expenses. And casinos are heavily regulated and monitored, so there isn't a Katz sitting behind the scenes making huge profits.

[MrButtons]

Originally Posted by Rutuu

You're right. That is a key distinction, so I retract my statement to rephrase.

I was completely unaware that you could run a 50/50 in this fashion, as I always thought they were allowed because 50% went to some charity or cause, and the other 50% went to the payout. The fact that the 50% for the cause isn't treated as a donation is mind bottling, but I believe you. And also know you are just letting us know the facts, without taking a position, which I appreciate.

Any tickets I've ever bought for a 50/50 (or meat raffles here in Aus...so good) were for the cause / kids / nice volunteers running it. Changing the branding of 50/50's to let people know that the money was just filling Katz's pockets would surely clip the figures.

Are the casino partnerships that are run classified in the same way?

Most charity events i went to the person who won the 50/50 donated most, if not all, their winnings back to the charity in the moment. I was under the same impression you were on how it works.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Rutuu

You're right. That is a key distinction, so I retract my statement to rephrase.

I was completely unaware that you could run a 50/50 in this fashion, as I always thought they were allowed because 50% went to some charity or cause, and the other 50% went to the payout. The fact that the 50% for the cause isn't treated as a donation is mind bottling, but I believe you. And also know you are just letting us know the facts, without taking a position, which I appreciate.

Any tickets I've ever bought for a 50/50 (or meat raffles here in Aus...so good) were for the cause / kids / nice volunteers running it. Changing the branding of 50/50's to let people know that the money was just filling Katz's pockets would surely clip the figures.

Are the casino partnerships that are run classified in the same way?

I haven't really looked into this, so apologies if I'm off the mark, but isn't this a case where the funds are donated, and the charity has high administrative costs? I see that this could be perceived as shady due to the parties involved, but there are many charities in similar scenarios, and it's not peculiar to the Oilers.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Slava

I haven't really looked into this, so apologies if I'm off the mark, but isn't this a case where the funds are donated, and the charity has high administrative costs? I see that this could be perceived as shady due to the parties involved, but there are many charities in similar scenarios, and it's not peculiar to the Oilers.

They don't tell us what the admin costs are for, it's administered by a company owned by Katz and the costs are astronomical. There's no way running a 50/50 costs that much. I don't think the costs increase in magnitude versus any other team's 50/50.

No other charity I know of does this badly on receipts versus payout to charities.

[Robbob]

Even if the admin costs were 10 times higher than the Flames, it would be around 5M. Not the 30M they are claiming. Their response just saying it is admin costs and not elaborating isn't helping things.

[Slava]

Is this the admin costs for the 50/50 or the admin costs for the charity? If it's for the charity itself, there are plenty of cases like this where the admin costs are very high and the percentage of donations making it to the "end cause" are lower than you may think.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Slava

Is this the admin costs for the 50/50 or the admin costs for the charity? If it's for the charity itself, there are plenty of cases like this where the admin costs are very high and the percentage of donations making it to the "end cause" are lower than you may think.

I think you need to go back and read the thread and the articles.

EOCF pays 28% of 50/50 ticket sales for “licensing and rights” to a private company called Win50 that is controlled by “the shareholder of the Edmonton Oilers Hockey Club”. In F2024, $28.3 million of 50/50 ticket sales was paid to this private company. In F2024, of the $102.4 million in 50/50 tickets sales, EOCF received 20% or $20.1 million.

These payment ratios have remained constant since F2022. From F2022 through F2024, EOCF's 50/50 ticket sales total $232.2m. $64.2m has been paid to Win50, the private company, and $45.5m went to EOCF to grant to local charities and hockey programs.

In F2023, EOCF signed another license agreement with an entity controlled by “the shareholder of the EOHC” called Ice District Fan Park. In F2023, EOCF paid $2.8m (and $0.3m in F2024) to renovate the Fan Park, a venue owned by Ice District Fan Park. To host events at the Fan Park, EOCF will pay fees. In F2024 EOCF paid $87k in license fees for six events at the Fan Park. This license agreement ends in 2027. EOCF will not have access to use the Fan Park unless the license agreement is renewed.

EOCF does not report paying any staff on its T3010 CRA filings. Instead it paid $1.2m in F2024 ($1.1m in F2023) to a company controlled by the shareholder of the Edmonton Oilers Hockey Club for administration and other contract services.



https://www.charityintelligence.ca/c...ity-foundation

[GioforPM]

Contrast:

Calgary Flames Foundation’s T3010 CRA filings for F2022 and F2021 report no paid staff. Yet, financial statements show personnel costs of $204k in F2022 and $138k in F2021. These were reimbursements paid for staff at Calgary Flames Limited Partnership (CFLP). Calgary Flames Foundation receives free office space, equipment, and support services from CFLP. CFF paid CFLP $836k for fundraising events and 50/50 support and $261k for staff reimbursement in F2023.

https://www.charityintelligence.ca/c...mes-foundation

[CroFlames]

Katz is a ####ing billionaire. So greasy having his paws out for a few more million from the Oilers Foundation.

####ing pedo.

[Sofa GM]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I think you need to go back and read the thread and the articles.

EOCF pays 28% of 50/50 ticket sales for “licensing and rights” to a private company called Win50 that is controlled by “the shareholder of the Edmonton Oilers Hockey Club”. In F2024, $28.3 million of 50/50 ticket sales was paid to this private company. In F2024, of the $102.4 million in 50/50 tickets sales, EOCF received 20% or $20.1 million.

These payment ratios have remained constant since F2022. From F2022 through F2024, EOCF's 50/50 ticket sales total $232.2m. $64.2m has been paid to Win50, the private company, and $45.5m went to EOCF to grant to local charities and hockey programs.

In F2023, EOCF signed another license agreement with an entity controlled by “the shareholder of the EOHC” called Ice District Fan Park. In F2023, EOCF paid $2.8m (and $0.3m in F2024) to renovate the Fan Park, a venue owned by Ice District Fan Park. To host events at the Fan Park, EOCF will pay fees. In F2024 EOCF paid $87k in license fees for six events at the Fan Park. This license agreement ends in 2027. EOCF will not have access to use the Fan Park unless the license agreement is renewed.

EOCF does not report paying any staff on its T3010 CRA filings. Instead it paid $1.2m in F2024 ($1.1m in F2023) to a company controlled by the shareholder of the Edmonton Oilers Hockey Club for administration and other contract services.



https://www.charityintelligence.ca/c...ity-foundation

Although maybe not illegal there isn't much greasier than skimming funds, that are understood by the public to go to charitable causes, to a non-transparent third-party company owned by Oilers ownership. There is zero chance these funds are not being used inappropriately but yet..............crickets.

[Jimmy Stang]

This sounds like a Rick Westhead type of story. Maybe a) he needs to learn a bit more about it, and b) it might attract more clicks and eyeballs next week when the season starts.

Dare to dream.

I don't even care that it is the Oilers. If it were the Flames I'd want it to be blown open as well.

[Shazam]

Barbers that cut mullets are very expensive you know.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Contrast:

Calgary Flames Foundation’s T3010 CRA filings for F2022 and F2021 report no paid staff. Yet, financial statements show personnel costs of $204k in F2022 and $138k in F2021. These were reimbursements paid for staff at Calgary Flames Limited Partnership (CFLP). Calgary Flames Foundation receives free office space, equipment, and support services from CFLP. CFF paid CFLP $836k for fundraising events and 50/50 support and $261k for staff reimbursement in F2023.

https://www.charityintelligence.ca/c...mes-foundation

How accurate is that site and how does it handle 50/50 sales when it comes to donated dollars? The oilers are listed as giving more “cents per dollar” donated than the flames. Seems hard to believe with this story.

[GullFoss]

I guess the 50/50 part is 50% of winnings to the winner and 50% for not the operator, of which charity gets the residual after expenses.

And if the oilers collect licensing fees as part of the oilers 50/50 operating expenses, that's okay...

The weird part is that I thought a 50/50 was 50% to charity. My bad I guess.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Weitz

How accurate is that site and how does it handle 50/50 sales when it comes to donated dollars? The oilers are listed as giving more “cents per dollar” donated than the flames. Seems hard to believe with this story.

It's as reputable as they come.

The Oilers gives more of their net proceeds. The problem is that's post-expenses. The actual return is less.

And the CFC banks a lot into interest bearing accounts to ensure there's an endless fund.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Weitz

How accurate is that site and how does it handle 50/50 sales when it comes to donated dollars? The oilers are listed as giving more “cents per dollar” donated than the flames. Seems hard to believe with this story.

They rate most registered charities. If anyone cares, their ratings for the NHL team foundations:
Oilers: 1 star
Canucks: 1 star
Flames: 2 stars
Canadiens: 2 stars
Jets: 3 stars
Leafs: 4 stars

I couldn’t find the right one for the Senators. These foundations in general tend not to be very efficient.

But with the amount of money the Oilers foundation has their hands on and what they are paying to Katz’s company, it really deserves much more scrutiny.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

They rate most registered charities. If anyone cares, their ratings for the NHL team foundations:
Oilers: 1 star
Canucks: 1 star
Flames: 2 stars
Canadiens: 2 stars
Jets: 3 stars
Leafs: 4 stars

I couldn’t find the right one for the Senators. These foundations in general tend not to be very efficient.

But with the amount of money the Oilers foundation has their hands on and what they are paying to Katz’s company, it really deserves much more scrutiny.

Yes, typically these foundations are set up to make a team look good while never losing money and shuffling expenses to them instead of the team. But the Oilers have taken the form to a higher level. There’s no middle company scooping “licensing and rights” fees in the tens of millions in the other examples.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Yes, typically these foundations are set up to make a team look good while never losing money and shuffling expenses to them instead of the team. But the Oilers have taken the form to a higher level. There’s no middle company scooping “licensing and rights” fees in the tens of millions in the other examples.

Seeing the rating for the Leafs foundation got me curious so I looked at their financials.

They aren't hoarding quite as much cash and MLSE actually makes some meaningful donations to the FOundation. Nearly $1 million between donations and buying tickets to fundraising. And nearly another $1 million in operating costs that they do not bill back to the Foundation. That actually stands out from these other ones, in a good way.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Seeing the rating for the Leafs foundation got me curious so I looked at their financials.

They aren't hoarding quite as much cash and MLSE actually makes some meaningful donations to the FOundation. Nearly $1 million between donations and buying tickets to fundraising. And nearly another $1 million in operating costs that they do not bill back to the Foundation. That actually stands out from these other ones, in a good way.

Yes. The normal foundations model is to use other people's money to make themselves look good. The Oilers use other people's money to enrich themselves and make themselves look good. If the leafs are actually giving their own money that's excellent.

[Strange Brew]

Maybe we shouldn’t be assuming that Katz and the Oilers are stealing from the Foundation.

Because in all seriousness, at least on paper this looks like a classic money laundering scheme. Isn’t $100 million in 50:50 proceeds a little fishy? More than 10x all the other teams. The arrangement with the related party gets the laundered money back in their hands.