Nashville is a horrible location because the lost 3M last season? What does that make Chicago, NY Islanders, Washington, Pittsburg, Detroit, NY Rangers or Anahiem?FLYLine4LIFE said:LOL WHAT A JOKE the OWNERS are. With there LIES LIES AND LIES!
224 MILLION LOST? ********! It was only 94 MILLION and the AVERAGE lost per team is only 3.1 MILLION. A salary cap for THAT? I DONT THINK So. I have lost ALL respect for the owners side now. The Levitt report was from the NHL side..the Forbes report is NEUTRAL.
Might i had only 17 Teams LOST money. So its not even LEAGUE WIDE. Im sure the TEAMS that did loose money are the ones where
1) The OWNERS set up a team in a HORRIBLE LOCATION like NASHVILLE where nobody cares about hockey
2) OWNERS made there PAYROLL way too high.
I was PRO owners for AWHILE but after this Im going to support the players. And its only a HANDFUL of players who want the big bucks...the Average player salary is like 1.85 MILLION only..which is VERY fair for a PROFESSIONAL ATHLETE.
You guys don't get it. Suite reveanue is areana controlled not NHL controlled, suites aren't seats, they're rented property. Revenue in suites might drop during the lock out as a portion of that total package is now gone. Same with arena sign revenue and naming rights. If a city or other league has control over those revenues are you counting them as a loss? No, you're only counting them as revenue.
I'm in property management (CBRE). I also own a landscape company. I do get landscape jobs from my property management contacts. So should CBRE be allowed to count my landscapping revenue as part of my base salary? No.
This is the same line of reasoning Forbes is using.