30M before the trades they made. Won't be as bad now.
Gretz has a tough job infront of him though. I would hate to be the person in charge of building that team up. They look pretty much screwed for years to come.
Gretz has a tough job infront of him though. I would hate to be the person in charge of building that team up. They look pretty much screwed for years to come.
Oilslick941611
Registered User
Holy smokes - even with the salary taken off to account for the trades, it's still a loss of $25+ million.
On the ice, Gretzky's had six years to build a contender already, and obviously isn't the answer. A bad team in a market that doesn't seem to be NHL calibre, unless there are other teams losing $25 million or worse.
coyoteshockeyfan
Registered User
Before all you whiny elitists up in Canada start salivating and calling for the team to be moved or any other such nonsense, the "report" was already denied by the Coyotes front office. John Gambodoro is known in the Phoenix area as being by far the worst sports writer in the city and constantly has his facts completely wrong.
First off, no one's even said anything about moving them to Canada in this thread and already you're insulting an entire nation.
If that's not flame war bait, I don't know what is.
Secondly, I don't see how the Coyotes could be losing that much money. Not with revenue sharing.
i'm not pro-coyotes or anti-coyotes - but i see no way possible for any team to lose that much money in this system. losing $30 million when your payroll is $40 million?
that's essentially saying the yotes only made $10million in revenue all season....complete bullsnot. obviously, there are other expenses, but not nearly enough to add up to $30million losses. either the writer or team source is full of it IMO.
that's essentially saying the yotes only made $10million in revenue all season....complete bullsnot. obviously, there are other expenses, but not nearly enough to add up to $30million losses. either the writer or team source is full of it IMO.
saskganesh
Registered User
yet, the only whinging in this thread is from Phoenix.
discrediting the article's claims is pretty easy, as other posters have already done.
discrediting the article's claims is pretty easy, as other posters have already done.
soundtigersfan
Registered User
The payroll for the team doesn't constitute all the expenses. There's the entire front office, the cost of running certain promotional giveaways, advertising, travel expenses, and plenty of other things that make losing $25 million entirely possible. We won't know for sure how bad the damage is until they issue a financial report, and I wouldn't take this writer's word as law. However, I would be willing to bet that the 'Yotes are going to lose a substantial amount of money this season thanks to a poor product both on and off the ice.
I highly doubt that these claims are true. There's a salary cap now, and that makes all 30 teams financially healthy.
no, they have other expenses other than salaries. In most sports salaries run anywhere from 30-70% of overall expenses. So if they have $40 million in salaries, maybe they have $60 million in overall expenses (someone else can give a better number that follows the NHL more closely). There are costs to someone for things like opening up the arena, paying off the building of the arena, travel, coaches, league office fees, etc. If they get 13,000 fans for 40 games for an average of $50 (plus concessions, jerseys sold, etc - again someone else can be more exact), then that right there is $26 million, so yeah I have a hard time believing it could be $30 million but I would think this report came from somewhere. It's common in sports to move the figures around so that the team loses money while the stadium or team owned tv company make money. So the "real" loss may be lower while the team technically could have a very large loss.
With TV money drying up, I don't see how the salaries can be so high? Can someone break down a typical team budget? Cause on paper MLS teams have similar game day attendance (probably a little lower) with ticket costs lower (maybe half) and fewer game days (15 regular season games vs ~40). So not considering TV money, they would have 20-25% the revenue per team. Their salary budgets are $2-3 million vs $40 million for the NHL. And overall MLS probably isn't profitable. So I'm just not clear how the NHL model can sustain typical salaries of mid-6 to seven figures for the players?
Sotnos
Registered User
ck26
Alcoholab User
Turns out we're all mistaken ... the Coyotes are doing fine, the Cototes of Fenix, BC (the oft-forgotten, still-operational WHA franchise that signed Guy Lafleur to a 60-year, $12,500,000,000 contract) are hurting a bit for cash. Turns out they haven't had a paying customer or a television contract for almost 30 years.
Hope that clears it up.
Hope that clears it up.
reckoning
Registered User
- Jan 4, 2005
- 7,020
- 1,264
I can't believe they could lose 30 million, it would be a horrible for any accountanat to figure out a team budget knowing those numbers.
Personally I don't care anymore. Darwin knows what happends if this situation continues.
Personally I don't care anymore. Darwin knows what happends if this situation continues.
razorsedge
Registered User
- Oct 19, 2006
- 5,197
- 4,778
Um...no, a salary cap makes all teams equal competitive wise. So teams have a chance at keeping most players, instead of losing them to richer teams willing to pay Pejorative Slured salarys.
Revenue sharing helps teams that didn't make money, cover they're losses. I'm sure years to come, some teams (no names) will be on the chopping block because of year after year losing money, and that takes away from the others teams revenue. I'm sure the money making teams won't want franchises in certain markets cause it costs the league as a whole, to having money loses franchises. I'm not naming Coyotes as one of them, unless they stay a crappy team and never make it to the playoffs.
it's not hard to believe the coyotes will lose that much.
13,000 paid x $ 42/avg x 41 games = $ 22.4 million.
presuming gate revenues account for 50% of total revenues: total revenues = $ 44.8 million.
looking at the expense side; player payroll projects to be around $ 43 million. presuming player costs are 60% of the Coyotes total expenses then total expenses come in around 71.6 million.
71.6 - 44.8 = a loss of $ 26.8 million.
take off $ 10 million for revenue sharing, and it's only a loss of around $ 17 million. perhaps this is why some are posting the coyotes deny the $ 30 million loss, as it will be $ 10 million less due to revenue sharing.
"The reason we don't have 30 healthy franchises is we pay too much out of our revenues on our expenses, and there are disparities which have competitive implications in terms of what our teams can spend and the product that they can put on the ice. With the right economic system, we can have 30 healthy, competitive franchises all with affordable ticket prices, which frankly all of this is about the fans. All of this is making sure that our game is as healthy as it can be. "
-Mr. Bettman on CBC, September 22, 2004
http://www.cbc.ca/national/news/nhl/bettman.html
Yeah, about that...did you pay the slightest bit of attention to Edmonton in the last week?
Meaningful revenue sharing would go a long way to making all 30 teams financially healthy. Too bad that wasn't addressed in the lockout.
To paraphrase US Senator Everett Dirksen:
A million here, a million there and pretty soon you are talking about real money
A million here, a million there and pretty soon you are talking about real money
let me begin by saying your post is beyond pointless considering you're just picking a bunch of numbers out of nowhere to come up with your mathematical analysis.
that being said - it still doesn't make sense. a team like florida, who is, by all accounts down here, going to break even, has similar attendance and payroll figures as phoenix. how is it the coyotes are $30million in the red and florida is breaking even? different situations of course, but the numbers (that actually matter, not the ones you pick from your rear) say there's no way one team could be that far behind the other. what - are the coyotes spending double the amount on airfair? are they giving away their concessions?
florida has a ton of corporate support which may sway the numbers in their favor some , but i doubt phoenix is so bad off to a point where the difference is $30 million (and thats assuming phoenix does not, which i have no idea whether they do or don't).
razorsedge
Registered User
- Oct 19, 2006
- 5,197
- 4,778
Yes, I did...did you?
The Oilers didn't give Smyth a new contract cause they didn't believe he was worth his asking price. So they TRADED him to NYI. Oilers could afford it, and had the capspace (remember the Oilers left some room after trading Pronger and his 6 million a year contract).
Anyways, were off topic now. If it's true that the Coyotes are projecting a $30 million loss, than obviously the new CBA isn't perfect. Also, thats gotta be some miss-management going on in that Franchise.
Phoenix has a ton of corporate support. Jerry Moyes, owner of Swift Transportation, owns the team and subsequently their plane they fly on. No, concessions are actually a little high but not too bad. We actually have the best lease in the NHL and get all hockey related revenue from the arena. There is NO way they stand to lose 30 million. Gambodoro is a moron and consistently gets everything he reports wrong. He is the AZ Republic version of Eklund or Garrioch. A monkey could whisper in his ear that Gretzky will play and he would report it as the holy gospel truth.
Plus, Wayne has come out and said they will be players in the free agent market, even after this 30 million loss claim. Quite frankly I'm getting tired of sore Winnipegers and Canadian elitists who think that hockey doesn't belong here or anywhere in the lower 48.
