List All the Possible Revenue that we all know of.

[gerbilanium]

Hockey card revenue, endorsements.

 

[CarlRacki]

I suggest you dig like I have, last year I tracked the usage of Wachova Center because Comcast to me is one of the glaring reasons why tracking revenue becomes impossible. In tracking the use of Wachovia Center, on average there were only 1-2 events per month during the basketball and hockey season and only 4-8 events in non hockey months and that was if they were lucky. Some of those events they include are companies booking suites for lunches. Check the current calendar and prove me wrong. There are currently on 3 events in Febuary and March that are not basketball and hockey.

http://www.comcast-spectacor.com/events/calendar_listView.asp?mm=3/6/2005&iEvtType=-1

sigh ... Wachovia Center (not Spectrum) events according to the schedule you linked:

3/5 Pro LaCrosse
3/6 Arena football
3/12 LaCrosse
3/13 Harlem Globetrotters (1 p.m.)
3/13 Harlem Globetrotters (5:30 p.m.)
3/19 LaCrosse
3/20 Arena football
3/26 LaCrosse
3/27 Arena football

That's nine out of 23 that are not the Flyers or the 76ers.

Consider yourself proven wrong.

 

[The Maltais Falcon]

I said that every building is different, and that's what makes it so difficult to count all revenues. This is the heart of the matter. The fight to determine what is and isn't hockey revenue if a cap is put in place will be something that takes weeks to fight about.

Like I said above, I think it would make much more sense to limit what constitutes hockey revenue to easily traceable sources that all teams benefit from, like ticket receipts, concession contracts, TV and radio contracts, merchandising and video game licensing monies and give the players a bigger percentage of that rather than trying to drag indirect sources of money (that teams might not even have ownership over) like parking and arena-naming revenues. If players want to negotiate a higher percentage of the direct revenues to compensate for what they might be missing out on indirect revenues, then that's fair.

Consider yourself proven wrong.

Laffo. Are you sure? Her passion in life is tracking events at the Wachovia Center after all. I'm inclined to take her word for it.

 

[vanlady]

Take a look at January, 2005. 18 non-76ers or Flyers events.
December 2004, 13 non 76ers or Flyers events. (and I didn't count Phantoms games that had been moved over)

Look back a few months. Not all months are equal.

Disney Stars on ice was scheduled as of November for the Spectrum as well. We also eliminate the NLL lacrosse and Kixx games which are never played in the Center and you get 2 events. If you take the Flyers schedule for this year you would see that more than half those dates were moved over to cover Flyers home games. Why do I suspect Comcast, try taking a course on hockey management and Comcast and MLSE are held up as the gold standard for how to utilize facilities.

Try counting dates during the Flyers season and not when the Comcast management is trying to cover off dates.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

Disney Stars on ice was scheduled as of November for the Spectrum as well. We also eliminate the NLL lacrosse and Kixx games which are never played in the Center and you get 2 events. If you take the Flyers schedule for this year you would see that more than half those dates were moved over to cover Flyers home games. Why do I suspect Comcast, try taking a course on hockey management and Comcast and MLSE are held up as the gold standard for how to utilize facilities.

Try counting dates during the Flyers season and not when the Comcast management is trying to cover off dates.

Lacrose games are always played at the Center.
Kixx games are played at the Spectrum.

Disney on Ice is always at the Center. There is a reason that the Flyers have taken their longest road trip of the year, usually 6-8 games from Christmas to about January 3-5.

The Ice show is always held at the Center.

Note the 76ers schedule: on the road from Dec. 22 - Jan 7th

It happens that like that every year.


Listen, I'm pro-player, like you are, but trust me on this issue regarding the Philly buildings. I'ev lived hear all my life. I'm a season ticket holder. The buildings are THAT busy.

 

[Mess]

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?

From the latest NHL proposal ..

"Finally, you've got to love this part of the league's last proposal, Section 12 that provides for an independent audit of club finances with penalties of $2M and the loss of a first-round pick for a first offense of failing to disclose required information, and a fine of $5M and loss of three first-rounders for a second such offense. But I thought Arthur Levitt already vouched for the accuracy of the league financial reports?"......

So I guess NHL fines and penalties are also Revenue

 

[Icey]

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.

Again this is the biggest problem in this lockout, not the cap or no cap issue, but rather what is revenue.

In Dallas the arena is owned 50/50 by the Stars (Hicks) and Mavericks (Cuban). When I pull into the parking lot I pay $10 to park in a lot OWNED by American Airlines Center. So all the revenue from parking goes to Ameican Airlines Center and hence goes to Tom Hicks. It's hockey revenue and should be counted as such.

 

[HckyFght*]

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.

Why should players be "entitled" to anything but a salary?
-H

 

[rwilson99]

Laffo. Are you sure? Her passion in life is tracking events at the Wachovia Center after all. I'm inclined to take her word for it.

She has been to see both buildings too... definitely an expert.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

Why should players be "entitled" to anything but a salary?
-H

If a luxury tax based system is put in place none of that stuff matters.

If it's any kind of system that ties payroll to revenues, which is what the NHL is pushing for, then revenues have to be clearly defined. Then you'll see a huge fight over what is and isn't "hockey revenue".

 

[SuperUnknown]

Again this is the biggest problem in this lockout, not the cap or no cap issue, but rather what is revenue.

In Dallas the arena is owned 50/50 by the Stars (Hicks) and Mavericks (Cuban). When I pull into the parking lot I pay $10 to park in a lot OWNED by American Airlines Center. So all the revenue from parking goes to Ameican Airlines Center and hence goes to Tom Hicks. It's hockey revenue and should be counted as such.

You see the problem is that if you include that parking revenue, Tom Hicks just has to sell it to someone else for a now profit and then the revenue won't be included anymore.

What you don't want to do with the "profit sharing" is make it so that the owners would rather sell the extras for now profit to cut down on shared revenues. It just doesn't make sense. If you penalize someone because he's also the owner of this and that, he'll just sell it right now for a profit that will go all to his pockets and reduce future revenues. You have to be careful with this.

Another example is the rink revenues. If there is no point for the owner to possess an arena, then they will just lease it and leave it to someone else and the revenue won't be counted then. That's why I said to allow revenues you need to verify what the advantages would be if it was independantly owned. Good accounting firms will be able to do that and to justify their choices based on general accounting/fiscal principles.

 

[creative giant*]

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.

Yes, and you said it. The actors don't get 90% of the ticket sales, the movie companies do. And movie companies are comparable to the owners of an NHL team. So, using your example the owners are entitled to 90% of ticket sales. I'm sure they would go for that, Einstein.

 

[quat]

Welcome to the new NHL, run by accountants.

And the old one, the one say 20 plus year previously was what? Good for players? I've got no issue at all with players making what they can, but when it starts to ruin the league and the game, then I have complaints.

For some reason you seem to not understand that the more responsible the players are for the revenue of the game, the better and healthier the game will be. The kind of CBA you want, is the one that takes the players completely out of the loop. "just give us our cash, pay us what you want" is so completely self serving as well as misleading. sigh.

 

[quat]

Unfortunately if payrolls are going to be tied to revenues, every revenue will need to be counted to the last dime.

Absolutely. But I'm talking about what should be reasonably defined as revenue. It's not difficult to see that hockey has an impact on a city, so there is really no limit to the grasping if you want to go that far.

I think you sit down and stick to the basics... if that includes parking then so be it... but figure it out and then move on.

 

[futurcorerock]

Players get a cut of that too.

No kidding they do... Each year EA and Sega feature a cover athlete who rakes in cash, and the NHLPA has to put their stamp of approval on a product that features its athletes... they get a cut.

 

[Stoneburg]

While we're at it, I think the players deserve a cut of the revenue of every parking lot, both privately owned or owned by the city, within 1/2 mile of a given arena, after all, these guys wouldn't be in business if it were not for the players.

 

[CarlRacki]

While we're at it, I think the players deserve a cut of the revenue of every parking lot, both privately owned or owned by the city, within 1/2 mile of a given arena, after all, these guys wouldn't be in business if it were not for the players.

There's a guy across the street from the United Center in Chicago before every Hawks game selling peanuts. The fact Tuomo Ruttuu and Jocelyn Thibault don't get a cut of his earnings in unconscionable.

 

[quat]

There's a guy across the street from the United Center in Chicago before every Hawks game selling peanuts. The fact Tuomo Ruttuu and Jocelyn Thibault don't get a cut of his earnings in unconscionable.

It's disgusting how that peanut vendor can ride free of charge on the backs of players like that. It puts me in a rage!

 

[Wetcoaster]

Here is the defintion from the NBA:

12. What is included in Basketball Related Income (BRI)?
Basketball Related Income (BRI) includes:

Regular season gate receipts
Broadcast rights
Exhibition game proceeds
Playoff gate receipts
Novelty, program and concession sales (at the arena and in team-identified stores within a 75-mile radius)
Parking
Proceeds from team sponsorships
Proceeds from team promotions
Arena club revenues
Proceeds from summer camps
Proceeds from non-NBA basketball tournaments
Proceeds from mascot and dance team appearances
Proceeds from beverage sale rights
40% of proceeds from arena signage
40% of proceeds from luxury suites
Proceeds received by Properties, including international television, sponsorships, revenues from NBA Entertainment, the All-Star Game, the McDonald's Championship and other NBA special events.

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#12

In the NFL it is called DGR (Defined Gross Revenues)

(al) "Defined Gross Revenues" or "DGR" means all of the League and Team revenues that are included within the definition of Defined Gross Revenues, as set forth in Article XXIV (Guaranteed League-wide Salary, Salary Cap & Minimum Team Salary).

ARTICLE XXIV

GUARANTEED LEAGUE-WIDE SALARY,

SALARY CAP, & MINIMUM TEAM SALARY
Section 1. Definitions: For purposes of this Article, and anywhere else specifically stated in this Agreement, the following terms shall have the meanings set forth below:

(a) Defined Gross Revenues.

(i) “Defined Gross Revenues†(also referred to as “DGRâ€) means the aggregate revenues received or to be received on an accrual basis, for or with respect to a League Year during the term of this Agreement, by the NFL and all NFL Teams (and their designees), from all sources, whether known or unknown, derived from, relating to or arising out of the performance of players in NFL football games, with only the specific exceptions set forth below. The NFL and each NFL Team shall in good faith act and use their best efforts, consistent with sound business judgment, so as to maximize Defined Gross Revenues for each playing season during the term of this Agreement. Defined Gross Revenues shall include, without limitation:

(1) Regular season, pre-season, and post-season gate receipts (net of admission taxes, and surcharges paid to stadium or municipal authorities which are deducted for purposes of calculating gate receipts subject to revenue sharing), including ticket revenue from “luxury boxes,†suites and premium seating subject to gate receipt sharing among NFL Teams; and

(2) Proceeds including Copyright Royalty Tribunal and extended market payments from the sale, license or other conveyance of the right to broadcast or exhibit NFL pre-season, regular season and play-off games on radio and television including, without limitation, network, local, cable, pay television, satellite encryption, international broadcasts, delayed broadcasts (which shall not include any broadcast of an NFL pre-season, regular season or play-off game occurring more than 72 hours after the live exhibition of the game, unless the broadcast is the first broadcast in the market), and all other means of distribution, net of any reasonable and customary NFL expenses related to the project; and

(3) Proceeds from the sale or conveyance of any right to receive any of the revenues described above.

(ii) The following is a nonexclusive list of examples of revenues received by the NFL and/or NFL Teams which are not derived from, and do not relate to or arise out of the performance of players in NFL football games (and are therefore not “DGRâ€): proceeds from the assignment, sale or trade of Player Contracts, proceeds from the sale of any existing NFL franchise (or any interest therein) or the grant of NFL expansion franchises, dues or capital contributions received by the NFL, fines, “revenue sharing†among NFL Teams, interest income, insurance recoveries, and sales of interests in real estate and other property.

Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, revenues derived from NFL Attractions (a joint venture that formerly included the NFL and St. Joe Corporation) from the operation of indoor NFL entertainment facilities, with entry rights separate from the stadium, which facilities do not permit the users thereof to view the live performance of players in NFL football games except by media available outside the stadium, shall not be included in DGR or Excluded DGR (except to the extent that revenues derived from NFL Attractions are addressed in the second sentence of Section 1(a)(iii) below). This exclusion shall apply so long as the business of NFL Attractions is conducted with a non-NFL third party that holds a non-de minimus interest and participates in the business of NFL Attractions. Each of the parties hereto reserves any positions it may have regarding whether any similar revenues derived from other sources are DGR, non-DGR or Excluded DGR.

Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, the NFLPA and Class Counsel may agree, on a case-by-case basis, with no limitation on their exercise of discretion, not to include in DGR network television revenue to the extent that such revenue is used to fund the construction or renovation of a stadium that results in an increase of DGR and/or Excluded DGR.

*Extension Agreement 2/25/98

(iii) Notwithstanding subsection 1(a)(i) above, the following shall be considered “Excluded DGR†and not included in Defined Gross Revenues: revenues derived from concessions, parking, local advertising and promotion, signage, magazine advertising, local sponsorship agreements, stadium clubs, luxury box income other than that included in subsection 1(a)(i)(1) above, sales of programs and novelties, and any categories of revenue (other than those listed in subsections 1(a)(i)(l)‑(3) above) currently included under NFL Films and NFL Properties, Inc. and its subsidiaries.To the extent that revenues of the NFL, NFL Properties, NFL Films, NFL Enterprises, any other NFL affiliate (other than NFL Attractions), any Club, or any Club affiliate result from any licenses to or other provision of intellectual property or other products or services to NFL Attractions, such revenues will be included in DGR or Excluded DGR, as appropriate, at no less than fair market value (e.g., to the extent that film, video, NFL logos or other intellectual properties or other products or services of such NFL and/or Club entities are utilized by NFL Attractions without the payment of any licensing fees, the fair market value amount shall be imputed). Any dispute over the fair market value shall be resolved in the first instance by the Accountants after consulting and meeting with representatives of both parties. In the event such dispute involves a disputed amount of $10 million or more, each party shall have a right to appeal such resolution to the Special Master, who shall review the dispute de novo, and whose decision shall be subject to appeal pursuant to Article XXVI, Section 2.

*Extension Agreement 2/25/98
(iv) In calculating Defined Gross Revenues, the amount of Excluded DGR divided by the sum of Excluded DGR plus DGR from all sources except network television revenues shall not exceed the percentage resulting from dividing 1992 Excluded DGR by the sum of 1992 Excluded DGR plus 1992 DGR from all sources except network television revenues. In the event Excluded DGR for any season exceeds the percentage resulting from the above calculation, any excess Excluded DGR shall be included in DGR. For purposes of the calculations described in this subsection (iv), Excluded DGR shall not include any revenues referred to in subsection l(a)(ii).

(v) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection 1(a)(i)(2) above, for the purposes of calculating Defined Gross Revenues for the 1993 League Year only, revenues derived from national network television shall be deemed to be $35 million per NFL Team. Any actual amounts received in excess of that amount shall be included pro rata in DGR for the 1994 and 1995 seasons.

(vi) It is acknowledged by the parties hereto that for purposes of determining Defined Gross Revenues:

(1) NFL Teams may, during the term of this Agreement, be owned and controlled by persons or entities that will receive revenues for a grant of rights encompassing both (a) rights from the NFL Team so owned or controlled (the revenue from which is includable in Defined Gross Revenues) and (b) other rights owned or controlled by such persons or entities (the revenue from such other rights not being includable in Defined Gross Revenues), and that, in such circumstances, allocations would therefore have to be made among the rights and revenues described in this Section 1(a); and

(2) NFL Teams may, during the term of this Agreement, receive revenue for the grant of rights to third parties which are owned or controlled by the persons or entities owning or controlling such NFL Teams (hereinafter “Related Entitiesâ€).

(vii) The reasonableness and includability in DGR of such allocations and transactions between Related Entities shall be determined by the nationally recognized accounting firm jointly retained by the parties, in accordance with the procedures described in Section 10 below.

(viii) For the purposes of any amounts to be calculated or used pursuant to this Agreement with respect to DGR, Excluded DGR, Benefits, Player Costs, Projected DGR, Projected Benefits, Required Tenders, Qualifying Offers, Minimum Salaries, Minimum Active/Inactive List Salaries, Team Salary, or Salary, such amounts shall be rounded to the nearest $1,000.

(ix)(1) In calculating Defined Gross Revenues, each League Year up to $5 million per year shall be deducted from DGR to the extent that such sums are received that League Year by the NFLPA pursuant to Paragraphs 5, 12, 29 and 30 of the Stipulation and Settlement Agreement in NFLPA v. NFL Properties, Inc., No. 90‑CV‑4244 (MJL) (S.D.N.Y.).

(ix)(2) In calculating Excluded DGR each League Year, amounts shall be deducted from Excluded DGR to the extent that such sums are received that League Year by any affiliate of the NFLPA, as provided in Paragraph 11 of the Sponsorship Agreement dated January 24, 2001.

* Extension Agreement 1/8/02

(x)(1)Without limiting the foregoing, except as specified in subsections (x)(2) through (x)(7) below, DGR shall include all revenues from Personal Seat Licenses (“PSLsâ€) received by, or received by a third party and used, directly or indirectly, for the benefit of, the NFL or any Team or Team Affiliate, without any deduction for taxes or other expenses. Such revenues shall be allocated in equal portions, commencing in the League Year in which they are received, over the remaining life of the PSL, subject to a maximum allocation period of fifteen years; provided, however, that interest from the League Year the revenues are received until the League Years the revenues are allocated into DGR shall be imputed and included in DGR, in equal portions over such periods, calculated on an annual compounded basis using the Treasury Bill rate published in The Wall Street Journal of February 1 during the League Year in which the revenues are received. Each equal portion of PSL revenues allocated into DGR, plus an equal portion of the imputed interest specified above, shall be referred to as the “Maximum Annual Allocation Amount.â€

(x)(2)To the extent that PSL revenues are used to pay for the construction of a new stadium or for stadium renovation(s) that increase DGR (regardless of whether the stadium is owned by a public authority or a private entity (including, but not limited to, the NFL, any Team or any Team Affiliate)), and if such PSL revenues have received a waiver of any League requirement of sharing of “gross receipts,†then such PSL revenues will not be included in a particular League Year in DGR or in Excluded DGR. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the maximum exclusion of PSL revenues each League Year from DGR shall be equal to any increase in DGR that directly results from such stadium construction or renovation (including through any spillover from Excluded DGR) as calculated in subsections (x)(3) through (x)(7) below.

(x)(3)Until the first full League Year the new stadium or the renovated facilities are put into service, the amount of PSL revenues excluded each League Year shall be equal to the Maximum Annual Allocation Amount. If the actual increase in DGR directly resulting from such stadium construction or renovations during the first full League Year in which such stadium or renovations are put into service (the “First Year PSL Increasesâ€) is less than any Maximum Annual Allocation Amount for that League Year or any prior League Year (the “PSL Differenceâ€), then the aggregate PSL Difference for every such League Year (assuming for purposes of calculating such PSL Difference, that the First Year PSL Increase had been received in each such League Year) shall be credited to DGR in the immediately following League Year.

(x)(4)Commencing with the first full League Year the new stadium or the renovated facilities are put into service, the jointly retained Accountants (set forth in Article XXIV, Section 10(a)(ii) below) shall determine the increase in DGR that directly results each League Year from a stadium construction or renovation funded, in whole or in part, by PSL revenues. In the case of a new stadium, such calculation shall be made by comparing the DGR directly generated by the old stadium during the last full League Year in which the old stadium was in service with the DGR directly generated by the new stadium during the League Year in question. In the case of stadium renovations, such calculation shall be made by comparing the DGR directly generated by those specific stadium facilities which are renovated, with the DGR directly generated by those facilities prior to their renovation (where new facilities, such as completely new luxury suites or premium seats, are constructed, the DGR directly generated by the facilities prior to their renovation would equal either zero, or the amount of DGR directly generated by any facilities that were replaced by the renovation). If the NFL or the NFLPA agree that a renovation is substantial enough to increase revenues throughout the stadium (e.g., significant renovations throughout the stadium which enable the Club to attract more fans and/or increase ticket prices) then the Accountants shall consider any increase in DGR throughout the stadium (e.g., increased concession, parking or novelty revenues spilling into DGR) as being directly generated by the renovation.

(x)(5)If the calculations set forth in (x)(4) above result in an exclusion of PSL revenues from DGR that is less than the Maximum Annual Allocation Amount, the Accountants shall report the amount not excluded from DGR as a “Carryover PSL Credit.†Such Carryover PSL Credits, if any, shall be deducted from a Team’s DGR in the first future League Year in which the amount of DGR directly generated by the new stadium or the renovated facilities exceeds the Maximum Annual Allocation Amount (the “PSL Excessâ€), but only up to the amount of the PSL Excess. Each dollar of Carryover PSL Credit may be deducted from a Team’s DGR only once, and only to the extent of any PSL Excess existing at the time of such deduction.

(x)(6)Any applicable deduction from DGR or Excluded DGR for any expenses (i.e., interest, rent, taxes or depreciation) that are attributable to premium seats or luxury suites included in any new stadium or stadium renovation project funded, in whole or in part, by PSL revenues excluded from DGR and Excluded DGR pursuant to subsection (x)(2) above shall be reduced, in any League Year, by an amount equal to the result obtained by multiplying (a) the gross deduction for such expenses that would otherwise be available under this Agreement in respect of such League Year, by (b) a fraction, the numerator of which is (1) the total PSL revenues described in the first sentence of subsection (x)(2), and the denominator of which is (2) the total costs for construction of the new stadium or renovations.

(x)(7)For purposes of this paragraph, the term “PSL†shall include any and all instruments of any nature, whether of temporary or permanent duration, that give the purchaser the right to acquire or retain tickets to NFL games and shall include, without limitation, seat options and bonds giving purchasers the right to acquire NFL tickets. PSL revenues shall also include revenues from any other device (e.g., periodic payments such as surcharges, loge maintenance fees, etc.) that the NFL and the NFLPA agree constitutes a PSL.

(xi)(1) Notwithstanding Section 1(a)(i)-(iv), above, premium seat revenues that otherwise would be included in Excluded DGR shall not be so included in a particular League Year to the extent that such revenues are used to pay for, or to pay financing costs for, the construction of a new stadium or for stadium renovation(s) that increase DGR (regardless of whether the stadium is owned by a public authority or a private entity (including, but not limited to, the NFL, any Team or any Team Affiliate)), and if such revenues have received a waiver of any League requirement of sharing of “gross receipts.†The maximum exclusion of premium seat revenue from Excluded DGR each League Year shall be equal to any increase in DGR that directly results from such stadium construction or renovation (including through any spillover from Excluded DGR) as calculated in subsections (xi)(2) through (xi)(6) below.

(xi)(2) Until the first full League Year the new stadium or the renovated facilities are put into service, the amount of premium seat revenues excluded each League Year shall be equal to the amount that receives a waiver of any League requirement of sharing of gross receipts (the “Non-Shared Amountâ€). If the actual increase in DGR during the first full League Year in which the new stadium or the renovated facilities are put into service (the “First Year Premium Seat Increaseâ€) is less than any Non-Shared Amount for that League Year or any prior League Year (the “Premium Seat Differenceâ€), then the aggregate Premium Seat Difference for every such League Year (assuming for purposes of calculating such Premium Seat Difference that the First Year Premium Seat Increase had been received in each such League Year) shall be credited to Excluded DGR in the immediately following League Year.

(xi)(3) Commencing with the first full League Year the new stadium or the renovated facilities are put into service, the jointly retained Accountants (set forth in Article XXIV, Section 10(a)(ii) below) shall determine the increase in DGR that directly results each League Year from the stadium construction or renovation funded, in whole or in part, with premium seat revenues. In the case of a new stadium, such calculation shall be made by comparing the DGR directly generated by the old stadium during the last full League Year in which the old stadium was in service with the DGR directly generated by the new stadium during the League Year in question. In the case of stadium renovations, such calculation shall be made by comparing the DGR directly generated by those specific stadium facilities which are renovated, with the DGR directly generated by those facilities prior to their renovation (where new facilities, such as completely new luxury suites or premium seats, are constructed, the DGR directly generated by the facilities prior to their renovation would equal either zero, or the amount of DGR directly generated by any facilities that were replaced by the renovation). If the NFL and the NFLPA agree that a renovation is substantial enough to increase revenues throughout the stadium (e.g., significant renovations throughout the stadium which enable the Club to attract more fans and/or increase ticket prices) then the Accountants shall consider any increase in DGR throughout the stadium (e.g., increased concession, parking or novelty revenues spilling into DGR) as being directly generated by the renovation.

(xi)(4)If the calculations set forth in (xi)(3) above result in an exclusion of premium seat revenues from Excluded DGR that is less than the Non-Shared Amount, the Accountants shall report the amount not excluded from Excluded DGR as a “Carryover Premium Seat Credit.†Such Carryover Premium Seat Credits, if any, shall be deducted from a Team’s Excluded DGR in the first future League Year in which the amount of DGR directly generated by the new stadium or the renovated facilities exceeds the Non-Shared Amount (the “Premium Seat Excessâ€), but only up to the amount of the Premium Seat Excess. Each Carryover Premium Seat Credit may be deducted from a Team’s DGR only once, and only to the extent of any Premium Seat Excess existing at the time of such deduction.

(xi)(5)Any applicable deduction from DGR or Excluded DGR for any expenses (i.e., interest, rent, taxes or depreciation) that are attributable to premium seats or luxury suites included in any new stadium or stadium renovation project funded, in whole or in part, by premium seat revenues excluded from Excluded DGR pursuant to subsection (xi)(1) above shall be reduced, in any League Year, by an amount equal to the result obtained by multiplying (a) the gross deduction for such expenses that would otherwise be available under this Agreement in respect of such League Year, by (b) a fraction, the numerator of which is (1) the total premium seat Non-Shared Amount dedicated to funding the project during the allocation period, and (2) the denominator of which is the total costs for construction of the new stadium or renovations.

(xi)(6)For purposes of this paragraph, the term “Premium Seat Revenue†shall include revenue from any periodic charge in excess of the ticket price that is required to be paid to acquire or retain any ticket to NFL games (other than PSL revenues and charges for purchase or rental of luxury suites), including charges in respect of any amenities required to be purchased in connection with any ticket.

(xii) An amount equal to the lesser of (a) $8 million for each League Year or (b) the amount contributed to or deposited with NFL Charities that League Year by or on behalf of NFL Properties or NFL Films, or any of their subsidiaries, shall be deducted from the calculation of Excluded DGR each such League Year.
* Extension Agreement 1/8/02
(xiii) Up to the following additional amounts, if committed to youth football programs and contributed by the NFL, its Teams, or their affiliates, in a qualified not-for-profit fund administered by a board jointly appointed by the NFL and the NFLPA, shall also be deducted from the calculation of DGR:

2002 League Year: $20.0 million
2003 League Year: $22.5 million
2004 League Year: $25.0 million
2005 League Year: $25.0 million
2006 League Year: $25.0 million

* Extension Agreement 1/8/02

(xiv) The parties may agree to allocate DGR received or to be received on an accrual basis in a particular League Year over one or more other League Years.
(xv) If a terrorist or military action occurs after January 8, 2002, with the result that one or more weeks of any NFL season are cancelled or that DGR for any League Year decreases to a catastrophic extent, the parties shall engage in good faith negotiations to adjust the provisions of this Agreement with respect to the projection of DGR and the Salary Cap for the following League Year, so that DGR for the following League Year is projected in a fair manner consistent with the changed revenue projection caused by such action.

http://www.nflpa.org/Members/main.asp?subPage=CBA+Complete#art24

No problem the NHL and NHLPA should be able to hammer this puppy out in what? - a couple of hours - once the NHL owners disclose all the books for the teams and related entitites and all sources of potential revenues so it can be examined and determined if it should be included as HRI (Hockey Related Income).

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

Why should players be "entitled" to anything but a salary?
-H

i agree ... they should get a salary based on what the owners are willing to pay. forget this stupid linkage and it will be that easy. just like the last 70 years of the NHL.

dr

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

Absolutely. But I'm talking about what should be reasonably defined as revenue. It's not difficult to see that hockey has an impact on a city, so there is really no limit to the grasping if you want to go that far.

I think you sit down and stick to the basics... if that includes parking then so be it... but figure it out and then move on.

which is why the league has to move off of linkage and establish a salary range that is independant of revenues, but subject to review at 4 years.

hey, 4 years of an unknown system is ok for the owners to offer the players, they should be willing to take the same risk.

dr

 

[Fish]

Why is it unreasonable ? If the Flyers didn't play there, Wachovia wouldn't have paid as much to put their name on the building.

Actually that's not necessarily true. The Wachovia Center is in a prominent location clearly visible from I-95 which has to be worth something...it's also a landmark that may be referred to by other businesses such as hotels (x miles from the Wachovia Center) etc...

There is some value from the Flyers playing there, but I don't think it's as much as you've calculated there...

 

[quat]

which is why the league has to move off of linkage and establish a salary range that is independant of revenues, but subject to review at 4 years.

hey, 4 years of an unknown system is ok for the owners to offer the players, they should be willing to take the same risk.

dr

Soooo... uhh. What?

 

[SwisshockeyAcademy]

i agree ... they should get a salary based on what the owners are willing to pay. forget this stupid linkage and it will be that easy. just like the last 70 years of the NHL.

dr

Simple as pie , i hope they give you the pulpit for ten minutes on Monday and we will have a season.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

Soooo... uhh. What?

whats your question ?

dr