List All the Possible Revenue that we all know of.

Discussion in 'The Business of Hockey' started by Biggest Canuck Fan, Feb 6, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Biggest Canuck Fan

    Biggest Canuck Fan BCF

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2002
    Messages:
    10,922
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Document solutions expert
    Location:
    Abbotsford, BC
    Home Page:
    I think because it is such an important thing, that we should all list revenue from what we know... Then we can list what classifies as player eligible revenue.

    This is all NHL related revenue:
    Tickets
    Luxury suites
    Sky Boxes (There is a difference)
    Merchandise
    Memorabilia
    Concessions
    Local TV Contracts
    National TV Contracts (TSN, CBC, ESPN)

    Anymore that anyone else can think of?
     
  2. vanlady

    vanlady Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2004
    Messages:
    810
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Arena Naming rights
    Corporate sponsorship
    Advertising
    Lottery
    Parking
    Personal appearances
     
  3. Icey

    Icey Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Messages:
    591
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Local Radio
     
  4. The Maltais Falcon

    The Maltais Falcon Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    1,156
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    I'm not certain players should be entitled to arena naming revenues. Maybe if the arena is owned by the team. But then only maybe. If it were, it should only be in proportion to the revenues the team brings in as a fraction of the total that the arena brings in. Same with parking.
     
  5. Icey

    Icey Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Messages:
    591
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Why shouldn't they? Afterall the owners get the revenue from parking and naming rights, so why shouldn't the players?

    This is the core of the problem with the lockout. Its not a salary cap, but rather what is a revenue.
     
  6. Hoek

    Hoek 001

    Joined:
    May 12, 2003
    Messages:
    5,814
    Likes Received:
    502
    Trophy Points:
    184
    Location:
    Tampa, FL
    Little hockey pixies that shower tons of money on the owners that they consistently deny exist, allowing them to claim they are actually losing money on their ventures.
     
  7. SuperUnknown

    SuperUnknown Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2002
    Messages:
    4,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    I think you have to look at just how related to the hockey business every revenue source is. You have to ask yourself those questions:

    Could it be independantly owned? If it could, then only the revenues that would have gone to the hockey club would it be independantly owned can be counted in. For example, if you don't own your arena, when negociating the lease, will you ask for concession revenues? Will you ask for parking revenues? What would be the price for the luxury boxes just for hockey? Etc.

    Remember that the losses figure used in the negociations is loss before amortization and interests. If you want to include most rink revenues, then the negociations must include amortization and interests, charges that are mostly arena related (as the cost of building the arena and the interests running on the financing done to cover the cost).

    Anyway... that's something competent accounting firms should be able to achieve with justification.
     
  8. futurcorerock

    futurcorerock Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2003
    Messages:
    6,831
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    Video Games
     
  9. Hockey players are not deserving of a cut of beer/concession sales in an arena. They may think they are, but they're not. They always like to compare themselves to movie stars because they are entertainers but I'm sure that when an actor has a clause in his contract stating that he gets a percentage of the gross sales that it doesn't include the popcorn and pop sales in a movie theatre.

    What makes hockey players so different? They should get a percentage of all HOCKEY RELATED REVENUE. That is ticket sales/merchandise and tv revenue etc.. Concession/Parking/Naming of the arena and the such go to the owners of the building. If the owner of the building happens to be the same as the owner of the team so be it. But the players are not entitled to it. And they are fools if they think they deserve it.
     
  10. Lexicon Devil

    Lexicon Devil Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2002
    Messages:
    8,343
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    ^- Stupid Post
     
  11. Phanuthier*

    Phanuthier* Guest

    OT: I think by now its pretty clear that the new CBA will indeed have a cap. What the players should now be fighting for is their fair shair of the pie for the cap.
     
  12. quat

    quat winsome, loathsome

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2003
    Messages:
    13,018
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    artist
    Location:
    Victoria BC
    Home Page:
    I think that players should get a big cut from the doctors and surgeons that see to their injuries as well, because without the players, these people wouldn't be making the kind of money they are. Same with car sales. Everytime a hockey player buys a car, he should get a percentage of that sale as well, because he is a known entity, a celebrity, and is now constantly advertising his vehicle free of charge. Beer sales increase in homes around Canada during game nights... chips too, so it can be accurately reasoned that it is the game (ie, the players, not the sport itself), that propels the sales... therefore... yup, the NHLPA deserves a healthy cut of that revenue stream.

    Let's see... Taxis, airplane flights for out of town fans... revenue revenue


    Seems to me, with all this commerce influenced by the players, they are obviously extremely underpaid.
     
  13. ArtG

    ArtG Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    2,811
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    96
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    love it! :)
     
  14. ScottyBowman

    ScottyBowman Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2003
    Messages:
    2,361
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Detroit
    Home Page:
    You do realize that the movie companies get 90% of the ticket sales revenues, right? I'm sure the players are happy to oblige, Einstein.
     
  15. Pavel

    Pavel Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2004
    Messages:
    2,592
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    84
    Location:
    Houston
    Players get a cut of that too.
     
  16. CarlRacki

    CarlRacki Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,438
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The players aren't analagous to the movie companies. They're analagous to the actors.
     
  17. ScottyBowman

    ScottyBowman Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2003
    Messages:
    2,361
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Detroit
    Home Page:
    Even better. Their is no movie salary cap nor is their any linkage with revenue.
     
  18. CarlRacki

    CarlRacki Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,438
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And movie companies aren't in a league.

    league = An association of states, organizations, or individuals for common action; an alliance.
     
  19. John Flyers Fan

    John Flyers Fan Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    22,416
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    Yes, they should get a share. now they don't get the whole thing, it's the percentage that needs to be determined, which would be different in every building:

    Example, number purely hypothetical:

    Wachovia Center in Philadelphia: $5 million per year for the name:
    Average number of events: 250
    Average number of Flyers games:50

    IMO the Flyers should get a minimum of 20% of that revenue assigned to them: $1 million

    Skyreach Center in Edmonton: $2 million per year
    Average number of events: 90
    Average number of Oilers games: 45

    IMO the Oilers should get 50% or more of that revenue assigned to them: $1 million

    ============================================

    Also parking for all games should absolutely count. No game, nobody is coming there to park in the lots.
     
  20. CarlRacki

    CarlRacki Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,438
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Just so we're clear, arer you suggesting that the Flyers' players receive $1 million from the Wachovia Center's naming rights? What about the people who invested the capital needed to get the facility built? What about the team ownership who negotiated the deal?
    I hope I'm misreading you on this, but if not this is yet another pro-PA post that seems to work under the theory that the owners deserve no profit from their massive investment in the league. That's a good way to kill a business.
    I can see an argument that the players deserve a small cut of that $1 million, but certainly nothing approaching the full $1 million.
     
  21. mytor4*

    mytor4* Guest

    Biggest Canuck Fan
    Thru the good and the bad



    Join Date: Feb 2002
    Location: Kamloops, BC, Can.
    Posts: 4,528
    List All the Possible Revenue that we all know of.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    I think because it is such an important thing, that we should all list revenue from what we know... Then we can list what classifies as player eligible revenue.

    This is all NHL related revenue:
    Tickets
    Luxury suites
    Sky Boxes (There is a difference)
    Merchandise
    Memorabilia
    Concessions
    Local TV Contracts
    National TV Contracts (TSN, CBC, ESPN)

    Anymore that anyone else can think of?
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------if that the case than the owners should get a cut of any endorsement that players are payed. no mattered what the endorsement is for the only reason the player is getting one is because his name is attached to the game. so if he get paid for doing a toothbrush commerical or anything than what is good for the players is good for the owners and the players should give there % to the owners
     
  22. The Maltais Falcon

    The Maltais Falcon Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    1,156
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Who owns the Wachovia Center? Is it Ed Snider? If so, then the Flyer players could make an argument that they deserve a cut. If not, then how can you argue they deserve a penny? Same thing with parking.

    If I own an arena or a parking lot that is independent of the team that rents that arena, there's no way in hell I'm going to give them a cut of any revenues I make on my business just because they happen to rent from me, just like if I were a landlord I wouldn't give a tenant a cut of my profits if I rent out or sell another house that I happen to own (or even sell the house they may have been living in.)

    Glen Healy gets bashed a lot but he did raise one interesting point last week on TSN. Rather than trying to unravel all these disparate revenue sources, the players should just demand a higher percentage of easily traceable revenue streams like ticket sales, TV money, and concessions.
     
  23. John Flyers Fan

    John Flyers Fan Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    22,416
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    No, not saying that the players get $1 million, but that of the $5 million total, $1 million of it gets listed under revenues for the Philadelphia Flyers

    Example using Philadelphia

    $5 million total should be listed as something like this IMO:

    $1.5 million - Flyers
    $1.5 million - 76ers
    $2.0 million to be split among the various other entities: concerts, kid shows, lacrosse, etc. etc.

    Then of that $1.5 million if the players end up with what ever is negotaited: 55-60%.
     
  24. John Flyers Fan

    John Flyers Fan Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    22,416
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    Yes, Comcast/Ed Snider own the Wachovia Center.
     
  25. CarlRacki

    CarlRacki Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,438
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I cqn understand a small cut, but not 55-60 percent. The fact remains the players took no risk building the facility, did nothing to make it happen and expended no effort acquiring the sponsorship. Giving them a large cut of the benefits of such a deal for doing nothing to make it happen seems unreasonable.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"