Are the Devils in bankruptcy trouble? UPD: Chambers to pay $25m to exit?

[Jerry Lundegaard]

Newark was a big mistake for the new arena.

 

[MAROONSRoad]

forbes 2010 had them 9th in revenue.

Not a good source really. I have a hard time believing the Devils bring in top 10 hockey revenue.

 

[Banana Sandwiches]

Not a good source really. I have a hard time believing the Devils bring in top 10 hockey revenue.

But they're a good source about them saying the Devils are headed to bankruptcy?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2011/11/04/new-jersey-devils-appear-headed-for-bankruptcy/

Even though the Devils attendance isn't really good, at least they're not like other teams who significantly cut ticket prices or give out tickets just to have people in the seats.

 

[htpwn]

But they're a good source about them saying the Devils are headed to bankruptcy?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2011/11/04/new-jersey-devils-appear-headed-for-bankruptcy/

No, they aren't a good source, but the Globe and Mail is.

 

[MJB Devils23*]

The Devils are always among the top 10 in revenue.

 

[BeastoftheEast85]

source?

Uhhhh what? I find that impossible to believe. Where did you hear it?

Number 9 in terms of revenue on

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/31/hockey-valuations-10_land.html

at 104 million. One of only 3 teams outside the original 6 to bring in more than 100 million in revenue. So again, relocation is not the issue I would be worried about as you can't make that revenue anywhere else except probably a 2nd team in Toronto. And relocation does not eliminate debt. I am afraid of reductions int he team's budget though.

Not a good source really. I have a hard time believing the Devils bring in top 10 hockey revenue.

Seriously? So then all these articles about the devils having financial problems are complete BS... And you are really saying that Forbes isn't a good source?

No, they aren't a good source, but the Globe and Mail is.

Forbes is one of the most respected business publications in the world. Who cares about The Globe and Mail outside of Canada (frankly most of Canada doesn't care anyway), and the publication has a history of bias problems.

 

[Wingman77]

Newark was a big mistake for the new arena.

How so?

Since the Devils moved from the Meadowlands to Newark their attendance has been better and at a more consistent rate every year

It is far easier for everybody to get to, not only being located further south towards the middle of the state, but due to how many more forms of access via more major road ways and mass transit there are

At the Meadowlands the Devils were stricken in certain areas by the NJSEA where as the Prudential Center is team owned......the move was something that needed to be done

 

[Jerry Lundegaard]

How so?

Since the Devils moved from the Meadowlands to Newark their attendance has been better and at a more consistent rate every year

It is far easier for everybody to get to, not only being located further south towards the middle of the state, but due to how many more forms of access via more major road ways and mass transit there are

At the Meadowlands the Devils were stricken in certain areas by the NJSEA where as the Prudential Center is team owned......the move was something that needed to be done

I agree w/ u as far as the logistics, but it cost so much money for that location. its biting them

 

[Killion]

How so?

Not so. No worries. This is as obvious as the nose on your face, or mine. The Devils will experience BK. That debt is just crushing. Coming out of it, at the other end?... Sunshine & Lollipops. Hang-in there guys, gonna be a rough ride, calls for relo & contraction.

Aint happenin... re-organization yes.

 

[knorthern knight]

Number 9 in terms of revenue on

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/31/hockey-valuations-10_land.html

at 104 million. One of only 3 teams outside the original 6 to bring in more than 100 million in revenue.

But a ton of interest payments. Plus they were anticipating a revenue stream from the New Jersey Jets home games this winter

So again, relocation is not the issue I would be worried about as you can't make that revenue anywhere else except probably a 2nd team in Toronto. And moving does not eliminate debt.

If the team is auctioned off in bankruptcy court, and the NHL approves the sale+relocation, then the proceeds of the sale would go into the pool for secured creditors to be paid off.

Having said that, I don't think relocation is in the offing. Contraction... maybe, but relocation... no. There is currently only one active suitor for an NHL franchise, namely PKP in Quebec. There are currently 29 ownership groups in the NHL. They'll obviously vote 28-to-1 for PKP to take the Coyotes off their hands first.

The only hope, a faint one at that, is that the NBA totally implodes, and Paul Allen or Les Alexander go looking for something to fill a 45-date hole in their arenas' winter schedules.

 

[Killion]

The only hope, a faint one at that, is that the NBA totally implodes, and Paul Allen or Les Alexander go looking for something to fill a 45-date hole in their arenas' winter schedules.

Interesting idea. Sort of like that re-make of the Poseidon Adventure huh?.

 

[MJB Devils23*]

The Devils play in the biggest market in the world. That helps them revenue wise. It's not too surprising why they constantly finish in the top 10 in revenue.

 

[Jeffrey93]

But they're a good source about them saying the Devils are headed to bankruptcy?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2011/11/04/new-jersey-devils-appear-headed-for-bankruptcy/

Even though the Devils attendance isn't really good, at least they're not like other teams who significantly cut ticket prices or give out tickets just to have people in the seats.

Or teams that have a max capacity of 15,000, eh? Am I right?

The Devils have spent.....so it would sort of surprise me that they would be in bankruptcy troubles after blowing a ridiculous wad of cash on Kovalchuk. If you're going broke you usually avoid idiotic contracts like that.

Unfortunately the Devils have never been in 'good shape'...even when winning Cups they weren't selling out playoff games. Boring hockey that wins was a big part of it....but most winning teams draw regardless of the style they use to win.

In my opinion it has been an 'iffy' market from the get-go. I wouldn't be surprised if they threw money at a problem and realized it just cost them more money.

And yeah...I agree....bad idea to put a new rink in Newark. Been there and talked to locals....not a single person thought it was a good spot to go to see a game. Beautiful rink....it is just before and after the game that are the problems.

 

[htpwn]

Forbes is one of the most respected business publications in the world.

Which happens to not be very well versed on the NHL. That doesn't necessarily mean everything that comes out of their presses is wrong, but it should be taken with a grain of salt.

Who cares about The Globe and Mail outside of Canada (frankly most of Canada doesn't care anyway), and the publication has a history of bias problems.

Sigh... do we really have to go through this debate again? Here's how it usually works:

1. American accuses <insert Canadian media outlet here> of being biased after a negative news piece against <insert American team here>
2. Canadian defends <insert Canadian media outlet here> and argues that nobody is more in touch with NHL affairs then the Canadian media.
3. Canadian media turns out to be correct.

 

[Jeffrey93]

Which happens to not be very well versed on the NHL. That doesn't necessarily mean everything that comes out of their presses is wrong, but it should be taken with a grain of salt.

Sigh... do we really have to go through this debate again? Here's how it usually works:

1. American accuses <insert Canadian media outlet here> of being biased after a negative news piece against <insert American team here>
2. Canadian defends <insert Canadian media outlet here> and argues that nobody is more in touch with NHL affairs then the Canadian media.
3. Canadian media turns out to be correct.

In both cases.....who cares what the source is? Argue the content. If somebody has proof Forbes is wrong....feel free to share. If somebody has proof the Globe & Mail is wrong...feel free to share.

I'm sort of sick of people that take pretty well respected media/financial entities and say "They're wrong"....but say absolutely nothing to support their argument. If the Globe was bashing the Devils out of "Canadian bias"...when it comes out that the Devils are doing just fantastic financially....would people believe their next story?

I haven't read the Globe article...but most papers provide sources. If it simply states "Sources say..."...then yeah....be skeptical. If some MP would put a motion forward to get rid of this "sources say" crap that apparently gives you carte blanche to say whatever you want......I'd vote for them...I'd even find a rental property in their riding just so I could vote for them. I get not revealing your sources....but it is going a little far lately.

Either way....if the Globe AND Forbes say the Devils are in financial troubles......I'd probably wager that they are, or are close. Who wouldn't?

Remember when the "Canadian Media" said the Coyotes were belly up and bleeding over $30M a year? Then Gary says that is "irresponsible reporting"....then weeks later Moyes fires the team into bankruptcy and everything reported comes out to be true???

Just thought I'd remind everyone of that.....

 

[DevilChuk*]

In both cases.....who cares what the source is? Argue the content. If somebody has proof Forbes is wrong....feel free to share. If somebody has proof the Globe & Mail is wrong...feel free to share.

I'm sort of sick of people that take pretty well respected media/financial entities and say "They're wrong"....but say absolutely nothing to support their argument. If the Globe was bashing the Devils out of "Canadian bias"...when it comes out that the Devils are doing just fantastic financially....would people believe their next story?

I haven't read the Globe article...but most papers provide sources. If it simply states "Sources say..."...then yeah....be skeptical. If some MP would put a motion forward to get rid of this "sources say" crap that apparently gives you carte blanche to say whatever you want......I'd vote for them...I'd even find a rental property in their riding just so I could vote for them. I get not revealing your sources....but it is going a little far lately.

Either way....if the Globe AND Forbes say the Devils are in financial troubles......I'd probably wager that they are, or are close. Who wouldn't?

Remember when the "Canadian Media" said the Coyotes were belly up and bleeding over $30M a year? Then Gary says that is "irresponsible reporting"....then weeks later Moyes fires the team into bankruptcy and everything reported comes out to be true???

Just thought I'd remind everyone of that.....

I am God.

Prove me wrong or I'm god.

Burden of proof is on you.

See how stupid that is now?

 

[DevilChuk*]

Or teams that have a max capacity of 15,000, eh? Am I right?

The Devils have spent.....so it would sort of surprise me that they would be in bankruptcy troubles after blowing a ridiculous wad of cash on Kovalchuk. If you're going broke you usually avoid idiotic contracts like that.

Unfortunately the Devils have never been in 'good shape'...even when winning Cups they weren't selling out playoff games. Boring hockey that wins was a big part of it....but most winning teams draw regardless of the style they use to win.

In my opinion it has been an 'iffy' market from the get-go. I wouldn't be surprised if they threw money at a problem and realized it just cost them more money.

And yeah...I agree....bad idea to put a new rink in Newark. Been there and talked to locals....not a single person thought it was a good spot to go to see a game. Beautiful rink....it is just before and after the game that are the problems.

So let's go through your logic again.

You state: If a team is broke, they will avoid idiotic contracts like Kovalchuk's.
Yet. The Devils did not avoid such a contract.

By your logic, that means they wouldn't be broke.

And trust me, locals aren't the people you should be asking about attending the game. The arena wasn't put there so Newark residents could go to the game.

Before and after the game are only a problem if you think you may have a heart attack walking to the train station via an above-ground overpass (or the parking lots about 10 feet from the arena's doors). You need not walk the streets of Newark for more than half a block and even then, the arena isn't located in the bad part of town.

Devils aren't golden financially, but different sources have thrown out various Devils bankruptcy problems for YEARS now and the team is still here. Top 10 in revenue, a HUGE TV contract and improving attendance make me seriously doubt the large figures being thrown around. They will obviously have some debts to pay off with a new arena and all.

Since the original article run in the NYPost (which had several factual inaccuracies on a multitude of levels), other papers have run similar things. I've yet to see any source material other than "unnamed sources" etc etc etc. Heck, the NYPost article had a sentence that was so grammatically flawed that it seemed to state Forbes were the ones who stated the Devils had a $260 million debt to pay off when Forbes *never* stated anything of the sort. I'll wait for the team by team evaluations Forbes will be releasing at the end of the month for some actual sources and none of this "i can make stuff up and have it printed because my name isn't attached" crap.

 

[Burner Account]

Gonna be a lonnnnnnnng year.

 

[Burner Account]

And yeah...I agree....bad idea to put a new rink in Newark. Been there and talked to locals....not a single person thought it was a good spot to go to see a game. Beautiful rink....it is just before and after the game that are the problems.

It's clear that you don't know much about New Jersey, then.

Newark is probably the most accessible city in the state. It's connected to New York, Jersey City, Hoboken, and dozens of towns by rail. Not to mention being surrounded by multiple highways.

Do you think they built the arena in Newark to draw the locals? The idea is to draw fans from the suburbs. Like Detroit.

 

[Jeffrey93]

I am God.

Prove me wrong or I'm god.

Burden of proof is on you.

See how stupid that is now?

You are not God.

Prove me wrong or you are not God.

Burden of proof is on you.

See how stupid that is now?

Too many people focus on the source of the info instead of the info. Just look at what the articles say instead of solely focusing on who is saying it....that is all I am saying.

And your example is ridiculous.....it equates the Globe and Mail to being a "God".

The Devils are in financial peril. Prove me wrong. I don't care who published the article.....show me reasons why I am wrong.

To stick with your religious analogy.....you stated you are God and asked me to prove you wrong. Smite me. Or turn the ice water I have in front of me into wine. Bam. Proven wrong.

What I meant was....if you think the G&M article was "wrong"....show some facts. Do some homework and add up the numbers you can find to show that they are easily a profitable franchise. It isn't THAT hard.

Who cares who wrote it??? If you say "7-11 loses money on their 1/4 hotdogs". Then I google stuff and find out the 1/4 lb. hotdogs they buy cost them 50 cents a piece..I can give a reasonable argument that you are wrong.

Right??

So....if a newspaper reports the Devils are in bankruptcy or nearing it because they are bleeding money.....you KNOW their payroll...you KNOW their ticket prices. Put together an argument that shows how they could be losing less, making more, breaking even, etc.

Don't just say "Oh.....look at the source...they're wrong and I am right....because I have a different bias than the bias I am reading." Put some effort (and trust me.....it takes like 10 minutes and about a 90IQ to do it.....) into it......at least a little bit of effort into it.

People saying "The globe and mail is wrong because they are biased towards Canadians" is no different than me saying "The police were right to arrest him because he's black". A stereotype is a stereotype.

I'm not saying the Globe and Mail is full of ethical and responsible reporters. But if you want to dispute what they say....dispute what they say, don't hammer on them as a publication.

 

[Jeffrey93]

It's clear that you don't know much about New Jersey, then.

Newark is probably the most accessible city in the state. It's connected to New York, Jersey City, Hoboken, and dozens of towns by rail. Not to mention being surrounded by multiple highways.

Do you think they built the arena in Newark to draw the locals? The idea is to draw fans from the suburbs. Like Detroit.

Oh I get it.....believe me...I get it.

But when people that live in the area tell you, as a tourist, "If it wasn't for hockey...we would NEVER come down here!!! EVER!!".....it sorta hits ya hard.

I have also spoken to several Devils fans online....and they say the same thing. If they weren't SUPER fans....they would not be going anywhere near "The Rock".

You can build any venue on major lines of transportation.....that doesn't mean it is a smart thing to do. Yeah...I can get there easily...but do I really want to get there?!?!

 

[Burner Account]

Oh I get it.....believe me...I get it.

But when people that live in the area tell you, as a tourist, "If it wasn't for hockey...we would NEVER come down here!!! EVER!!".....it sorta hits ya hard.

I have also spoken to several Devils fans online....and they say the same thing. If they weren't SUPER fans....they would not be going anywhere near "The Rock".

You can build any venue on major lines of transportation.....that doesn't mean it is a smart thing to do. Yeah...I can get there easily...but do I really want to get there?!?!

It's Newark. It's not New York. It's not a touristy area.

The arena is the only reason I go to Newark. I don't see what your point is there. See above; it's not a tourist city.

When the Devils played in the Meadowlands, it was more inconvenient. Yeah, I want to get there, but do I really feel like sitting in traffic in the parking lot? Newark is a lot more accessible. That was 90% of the motivation for the move.

 

[Jeffrey93]

So let's go through your logic again.

You state: If a team is broke, they will avoid idiotic contracts like Kovalchuk's.
Yet. The Devils did not avoid such a contract.

By your logic, that means they wouldn't be broke.

That is what baffled me...yes. If they are near broke...why sign Kovalchuk? Unless you are throwing money at a money loser. Which happens often.

And trust me, locals aren't the people you should be asking about attending the game. The arena wasn't put there so Newark residents could go to the game.

By the attendance figures...not a whole lot of people are going to the games...from Newark or otherwise.

Before and after the game are only a problem if you think you may have a heart attack walking to the train station via an above-ground overpass (or the parking lots about 10 feet from the arena's doors). You need not walk the streets of Newark for more than half a block and even then, the arena isn't located in the bad part of town.

Bad enough part of town from the people I talked to. It has been mentioned on hockey broadcasts as well. I guess we're all wrong and Newark is just a SUPER HAPPY place!

Devils aren't golden financially, but different sources have thrown out various Devils bankruptcy problems for YEARS now and the team is still here. Top 10 in revenue, a HUGE TV contract and improving attendance make me seriously doubt the large figures being thrown around. They will obviously have some debts to pay off with a new arena and all.

So...........different places say the team is bankrupt........but you say attendance is improving. Where exactly are you saying that the Devils aren't belly-up??

Since the original article run in the NYPost (which had several factual inaccuracies on a multitude of levels), other papers have run similar things. I've yet to see any source material other than "unnamed sources" etc etc etc. Heck, the NYPost article had a sentence that was so grammatically flawed that it seemed to state Forbes were the ones who stated the Devils had a $260 million debt to pay off when Forbes *never* stated anything of the sort. I'll wait for the team by team evaluations Forbes will be releasing at the end of the month for some actual sources and none of this "i can make stuff up and have it printed because my name isn't attached" crap.

So.....you don't believe Forbes...but will wait for their final result???

Here is a tip. If Fobres thinks your team is losing $10M it is safe to say your team is probably losing at least $5M. Forbes says your team is in debt $260M. Right? Even if they are wrong by 50%.....the team is still in the hole $130M!!! Not good.

There is a lot of smoke around the Devils....which makes me think there is fire. If you want to try to convince all these people that all this smoke is the result of NO fire. Go ahead. But the burden of proof is obviously on you from here on out....

 

[DevilChuk*]

So your response to my sarcasic retort of you thinking the burden of proof should be on the accused is to say the burden of proof should be on the accuser?

That's intelligent.. and not hypocritical at all.

I'll wait for Forbes official evaluation. Since, ya know, I can also say "Forbes upcoming reports will show the Canadiens are last in the league in revenue" without any proof since noone can disprove something that hasn't happened yet. If there was a huge legitimate story here, one that involved bankruptcy to the extent predicted, I don't think Forbes, as a news organization, will sit on it and allow themselves to be beaten to the punch. If there was something there, there'd be an article from Forbes on it already as opposed to "sources" familiar with the Forbes reports.

 

[Marv4Life]

But when people that live in the area tell you, as a tourist, "If it wasn't for hockey...we would NEVER come down here!!! EVER!!".....it sorta hits ya hard.

I have also spoken to several Devils fans online....and they say the same thing. If they weren't SUPER fans....they would not be going anywhere near "The Rock".

Same could be said about the Yankees in the South Bronx, Mets in Flushing, your Islanders in Uniondale NY, Wings in Detroit, Capitals in Chinatown(during the early years), Blackhawks in their spot, Oilers in theirs, Kings in LA before LA Live, etc. etc. all were/are in worse locations than our arena was built in(which BTW is being redeveloped with 2 chain hotels on top of the new restaurants already opened/opening up), so I don't get your point. Plus the arena was 3rd in the nation in revenue behind MSG and Staples so again I don't understand your point.

Bad enough part of town from the people I talked to. It has been mentioned on hockey broadcasts as well.

Recently? And even so, most probably haven't seen a bunch of black people walking around in their lives.

By the attendance figures...not a whole lot of people are going to the games...from Newark or otherwise.

Not because of the location. They're averaging more than they did in their last couple of years at the swamp when they were good. They were 90% capacity in 2009. But go ahead and pretend a mediocre, poorly marketed team with insane ticket prices has nothing to do with it right now.

it is just before and after the game that are the problems.

And what are these "problems"? There are cops there, there are restaurants within walking distance. One of the region's major transit hubs is also close by. So enlighten me with these "problems".