Since you asked for a link here are a few to start with:
So, a quick perusal of your links shows that every official voice in the league or NHLPA disagrees with your analysis of revenue splits?
Um, thanks, I guess.
Ike, you come here once in a blue moon when someone challenges Bettman. The rest of us actually follow what is going on.
Don't give me that, I've been here as long as you, I just choose not to battle the groupthink here as most of the educated voices that go contrary to it have gone... missing (case in point - the guy who pointed out the edit earlier in the thread), or simply tire of having to post or post rebuttals to the exact same arguments over and over as they get ignored (the fact I've already posted a detailed mathematical analysis of Canadian currency which was summarily ignored being a striking case in point). As we see from Fugu's post after yours, there's a considerable amount of positive feedback loopage coupled with some other posters posting utterly insane 'theories' ("Canada will never win a cup with Bettman as commissioner") that make it far too tiring to stay here for very long to defend the truth.
First lets be clear, my claim is that since the big downfall that the Canadian teams have had a disproportionate growth in revenues.
If you are admitting that the percentage isn't nearly as significant if you go before the US crash - which I believe you already have earlier - then you are not as far from my position as you think. When I worked the numbers the first time disproving Fugu I actually worked from 2004.
I have no problem saying that the Canadian share of league revenues has been stronger since the economic crash, though the degree of this is of course what is still being overstated.
Given the relative strengths of the two economies I wonder why this might even be up for debate. But since you seem to disagree, why do I say this?
My first piece of evidence is the fact that every Canadian team with the possible exception of Ottawa increased their ticket prices by at least 5% in each year since the recession. A significant number of US teams either froze prices or rolled them back. The Canadian teams maintained their attendance throughout the recession. The Oilers and Flames added substantially to their TV monies with the new Sportsnet deal...
If you would like me to go on I can.
You can if you like. All I see is theories to disregard the official statements from the league and NHLPA in order to substitute your own numbers. I can't stop you from doing that. I don't have to believe yours are more accurate, though.
Now this does not suggest that there were not some successful US teams because there were. But the statement that the Canadian teams did better proportionally throughout the recession is undisputable.
Some did, some didn't. Some US teams did, some didn't too. Take out the unusually high increase from Montreal and the Canadian teams didn't really do any differently once the money came in, regardless of where it originated from. It's worth noting that the fact some Canadian teams did not grow even at the rate of the CAD (which indicates their true revenues actually shrank) seems to have been ignored. Stronger CAD at the rates you are claiming should have made for a smooth ratio of performance from the Canadian teams, but this did not happen.
Honestly Ike, I don't even know what to say here. This is so completely and obviously wrong that it seems futile to respond. The NHL converts all of their income into US dollars. And as Fugu so aptly points out, no matter when you make this conversion
$1 US = $1US.
I would have thought it goes without saying that if the US dollar was stronger, the relative contribution of Canadian teams would be lower, since a stronger US dollar raises its value relative to the Canadian dollar by definition. This is pretty basic stuff and the only reason I can see that you would argue against it is because you have misread it somehow. Do you really think Canadian team revenues relative to the total go up if the Canadian dollar goes up but US team revenues relative to the total don't go up if the US dollar goes up? No, you don't believe that, but you seem to be arguing it suddenly.
If you are a money person as you seem to be hinting, you must know that currency is simply a frame of reference. It doesn't matter in the least what it is reported in. Easy math:
Total revenues: 10b US
US revenues to Can revenues: 5b/5b
Dollars: 1:1
Cut the US dollar in half: 15b US total, contributions 5b from US 10b from Canada, Canadian contribution increases from 50% to 67%. Use CAD: 7.5b CAD total, contributions 2.5b from US 5b from Canada, Canadian contribution increases from 50% to 67%. That is the "US dollar got weaker" math. Or, from original numbers, double the strength of Canadian dollar. 15b US total, contributions 5b from US 10b from Canada, Canadian contribution increases from 50% to 67%. Use CAD: 7.5b CAD total, contributions 2.5b from US 5b from Canada, Canadian contribution increases from 50% to 67%. That's the "Canadian dollar got stronger" math.
The numbers stay exactly the same.
And so follows what I said. The ratio of Canadian team revenues to US team revenues
does not change whether or not you increase the value of the Canadian dollar or decrease the value of the US dollar at the same relative rate. Therefore, it is just as valid to say the US teams' relative share of the league revenues are underperforming because of a weak US dollar relative to the CAD as it is to say the Canadian teams' relative share of the league revenues are overperforming because of a strong CAD relative to the US dollar. However, because this indicates that the league is actually doing better than might be expected from their revenue, which runs counter to the prevailing opinion of those who dislike the league's leadership, this view is for some reason being disparaged, even though it uses the
exact same numbers.
Convert revenues to a third party and it would be blatantly obvious that I am right in this.
So now back to the question we started with...the impact of the change in the $CDN from downturn...
First let's calculate league revneues. To do this we use the cap of $64.3 and subtract $8M to get the midpoint of $56.3M. Factoring out the 5% inflator gives a true midpoint of $53.62M. With the players share at 57% and with 30 teams that gives us an estimate of revenues at $2.82B with a little wiggle room.
The league has already stated it is over 2.9b, but sure, let's use that.
Now back to my estiamtes of the % in $CDN. Assuming the range of 31-33% was accurate when calculated , factoring in that the dollar has appreciated by about 14% from that time would under proportional grow give us a new range of 35-37%.
What dates are you using? I've been using a more useful yearly increase of 10%. Using the more likely numbers actually supplied by official sources in your own links puts this at about 29%-30% so far.
From their factoring in significant things things like the increases in CDN TV money as well as even an extremely modest disproportional growth rate for CDN teams and that number is easily in the 37-39% range for the 2010-2011 season. (This may drop a touch when the new US TV contract kicks in).
So at the midpoint of 38% that would put an estimate of the income from $CDN sources at $1.07B. If there had been no currency increase since the recession that number would be 16% lower giving us a currency related growth number of $171M since the recession.
Well, thank you for your numbers. They aren't necessarily right, mind you, but its nice to see the assumptions behind them.
Now lets go through your math using the numbers actually given by people with access to the real thing. Given 26% given by the NHLPA and Forbes (which jives with Bettman's statements, though he didn't give a direct number), boosted by a 10% currency gain to about 29% to be kind to you in rounding, and giving the same 2% you're assuming without any numbers from a CBC gain, we now have Canadian revenues at about 870m which oddly enough falls exactly in line with my own estimations from expected gains from 2010 if Canadian teams grew about the same as American teams.
10% lower to drop the currency increase is about 87m. 87m out of 400m is 22%, a bit higher than I was estimating but not out of the ballpark, and the actual amount (rather than the relative percentage) is very much inside what I was suggesting, if a bit at the high end.
Using your math shows my number to be correct using official sources, so unless you believe the NHL and NHLPA were/are lying, the only provable bias is in your own assumptions. I don't have any desire to fight this "1/3" battle with you as you've obviously spent far more time on it than I am willing to go into; I'll just stick with the official numbers given.
Given official numbers, the yearly gains from the Canadian currency is at best a yearly boost of 22% or so each of the last couple years, and since the lockout far less.
And that's undeniable regardless of whether or not Fugu thinks it is...
elegant.
You may not know this about me, but I am actually pretty good with numbers. So when I said my guess was in the range of 40-45% I was not just pulling things out of the air.
Actually, the problem seems to be that you
are. You are using your assumptions or subjecting revenue to analysis that runs contrary to official sources that are in your own links. Hey I'm not going to say that is wrong. But you, in turn, cannot say my numbers are wrong while using the numbers actually stated by people who do, in fact, have direct access to the league books.
One other thing Fugu is wrong about - I DID, in fact, separate currency revenue from non-currency revenue - in fact, I showed that currency couldn't possibly be the most significant factor (defining this as 50%+) in league revenues because there simply wasn't enough of a gain.
People blame Bettman for a lot, but you're the first person I've heard that blames him for the great recession.
