Coyotes to lose 30M?

Stone87

Registered User
Mar 20, 2005
1,750
0
Rochester
I'm not sure of the fourth period's media credentials, but a story today claims the Lightning will be cutting payroll to the $ 37 million range next season. http://www.thefourthperiod.com/news/tbl070304.html

There was a story not too long ago claiming the Lightning could lose in the range of $ 9 million this season.

with 20,000 in attendance and conceivably losing almost $ 10 million, I think it's conceivable that the Coyotes could lose $ 25 million with attendance below 15,000. I guess without knowing the actual paid attendance it's impossible to know for sure, but presuming these reports are true, anything's possible.

The numbers don't really match up for the lightning either. Maybe Forbes isn't as reputable as we are led to believe? The Lightning according to Forbes made 5 million last year. How do you lose 14 more million dollars one year later with virtually the same team on the ice, for almost the same payroll. They also get two million a year from local government.
 

Stone87

Registered User
Mar 20, 2005
1,750
0
Rochester
The other thing to keep in mind is that if Phoenix is losing 30 million and Tampa Bay 9 million which are way different than what Forbes is reporting for last season. In order for the cap to go up the other teams in the league not only need to grow by quite a bit to put the cap up in the 48 million range but they also have to overcome these new losses. Bottom line is a few teams make a lot and most make between like 3-10 million a year. If one team is losing 30 a year thats a lot of revenue to make up if the cap is to go up.
 

Sotnos

Registered User
Jul 8, 2002
10,885
1
Not here
www.boltprospects.com
I'm not sure of the fourth period's media credentials, but a story today claims the Lightning will be cutting payroll to the $ 37 million range next season. http://www.thefourthperiod.com/news/tbl070304.html
Did you notice the source on that? Bruce Garrioch. 'nuff said.

That should be sufficient, but since I'm sure you'll argue about it anyway - He pulled that payroll figure completely out of his backside, to put it kindly. He's either grumpy because he didn't get his daily donut or just pissed off that Feaster won't give him an interview...or something, because he's forever publishing outright lies about Tampa.

BTW - you want to be "friends", yet you pass on BS rumors about my team, somehow that doesn't endear you to me, ya know? ;)
 

Hawker14

Registered User
Oct 27, 2004
3,084
0
Did you notice the source on that? Bruce Garrioch. 'nuff said.

That should be sufficient, but since I'm sure you'll argue about it anyway - He pulled that payroll figure completely out of his backside, to put it kindly. He's either grumpy because he didn't get his daily donut or just pissed off that Feaster won't give him an interview...or something, because he's forever publishing outright lies about Tampa.

BTW - you want to be "friends", yet you pass on BS rumors about my team, somehow that doesn't endear you to me, ya know? ;)

why are you attacking me - RE: posting BS rumours. how would I have proof whether these reports are true are untrue. i'm merely posting them and the hypothetical that if they are true, then it's feasible the coyotes could lose $ 25+ million. i even qualified my own statement that i don't know the legitimacy of the fourth period.

Our friendship obviously needs some help for you to treat me this way. ;)
 

John Belushi

Registered Boozer
Feb 5, 2006
2,675
242
North Vancouver
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.


Do you have an argument saying otherwise? I mean, other than call us a bunch of whiny elitists?

I have seen very little in a decade that would prove to me that Phoenix can support hockey. I though Gretzky might help but...:dunno:
 

bleed_oil

Registered User
Aug 16, 2005
3,898
40
Its sad that a fabulous passionate hockey market like Winnepeg could lose a hockey team to a nothing hockey town like Phoenix. That in itself is everything thats wrong with the NHL
 

grego

Registered User
Jan 12, 2005
2,390
97
Saskatchewan
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.

Also add in money from TV contract, even if it is small there is money for that.

All forms of memorabilia bought by fans, luxury boxes in arenas draw lots of money


I am sure the Coyotes may have lost, but there are also a lot of additional forms of revenue for the team that should help them out, and they won't be close to a 30 million dollar loss
 

Jarnberg

Registered User
Jul 10, 2002
5,689
34
Nashville
Visit site
No, it's comments from YOu, bleed_oil, that is wrong with the NHL.

Agreed. Too many people sit around and complain about all that is wrong with the game, about how the NHL is this terrible league and complain about every market that doesn't fit their standards. Yet they still talk about the league on a NHL message board. Too many articles about people whining about the sport. It gets old and does not help the league one bit (not like they care).
 

Jarnberg

Registered User
Jul 10, 2002
5,689
34
Nashville
Visit site
Why waste time trying to sell hockey to markets where it will never be popular.

I wonder what would have happened had the NHL had this philosophy when the league started to expand past 6 teams.

You can't say that it will never be popular. Now, will it ever be as popular in some markets as it is in say Edmonton or Toronto? That is a different argument but one that you are basing your post on.
 

Bear of Bad News

Your Third or Fourth Favorite HFBoards Admin
Sep 27, 2005
13,345
26,521
In Edmonton a pair of tickets worth 200 bucks were going for 1500 on Ebay.

Goodie for that. :shakehead

It's xenophobes like you that are a large part of the problem. Why should a casual sports fan take an interest in the sport, when all they're going to hear from you is how they don't deserve it? And how they're not good enough to be a hockey fan?
 

Sotnos

Registered User
Jul 8, 2002
10,885
1
Not here
www.boltprospects.com
why are you attacking me - RE: posting BS rumours. how would I have proof whether these reports are true are untrue. i'm merely posting them and the hypothetical that if they are true, then it's feasible the coyotes could lose $ 25+ million. i even qualified my own statement that i don't know the legitimacy of the fourth period.

Our friendship obviously needs some help for you to treat me this way. ;)
Well, just so you know for future reference, the Team President has already said the payroll will be between $40-$42 million, and the source of this $37 million is, best we can tell, Bruce Garrioch's feeble brain. I know who I believe.

I'm SO glad you want to work on our relationship! I almost kind of like you, for some strange reason. And it scares me. :(

But this thread is for bashing on Phoenix, so I'll let you get back to it! :D I seriously doubt they lost $30 million though. Doesn't sound feasible to me.
 

XX

Waiting for Ishbia
Dec 10, 2002
54,886
14,502
PHX
Revenue has gone up for the Coyotes according to Forbes every season. Last season, they only lost 6 million. Now, this year, the cap is still going up, and taking quite the leap. I find it hard to believe that with roughly the same roster salary, the Coyotes managed to lose 5x as much money.
 

undraftedstlouis

Registered User
Sep 11, 2004
668
0
I wonder what would have happened had the NHL had this philosophy when the league started to expand past 6 teams.

You can't say that it will never be popular. Now, will it ever be as popular in some markets as it is in say Edmonton or Toronto? That is a different argument but one that you are basing your post on.


NHL West - Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Minneapolis, Milwaukee, Chicago, Detroit, Denver, Winnepeg, Columbus

NHL East - Montreal, Toronto, Hamilton, Quebec, Ottawa, New York, Boston, Hartford, Philadelphia, Buffalo

Consider St Louis, LA, Dallas, Tampa Bay if you want to extend somewhat across the US. Play everyone intraconference 2 times home/away, everyone from the other conference once home & away. 8 team playoff.

I'm not saying this is what they should have done. Just that it'd be a more natural growth pattern and I could see such a league with intense, enthusiastic fans which may translate better into TV rights for the rest of the US and world to watch? Just seems like a more viable, healthier league. And if payrolls were cut in half, what would the players do? How many would go to European leagues?

I'm saying all this as a Tampa Bay fan. In Florida there's a retired Canadien fanbase but otherwise your selling the game to fans who never have and probably never will have played the game. I think you can only go so far using that kind of market. A few is fine, but when 1/3 to half the league is in that situation, I have concerns. I think the NHL lost me with Nashville.
 

Jarnberg

Registered User
Jul 10, 2002
5,689
34
Nashville
Visit site
NHL West - Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Minneapolis, Milwaukee, Chicago, Detroit, Denver, Winnepeg, Columbus

NHL East - Montreal, Toronto, Hamilton, Quebec, Ottawa, New York, Boston, Hartford, Philadelphia, Buffalo

Consider St Louis, LA, Dallas, Tampa Bay if you want to extend somewhat across the US. Play everyone intraconference 2 times home/away, everyone from the other conference once home & away. 8 team playoff.

I'm not saying this is what they should have done. Just that it'd be a more natural growth pattern and I could see such a league with intense, enthusiastic fans which may translate better into TV rights for the rest of the US and world to watch? Just seems like a more viable, healthier league. And if payrolls were cut in half, what would the players do? How many would go to European leagues?

I'm saying all this as a Tampa Bay fan. In Florida there's a retired Canadien fanbase but otherwise your selling the game to fans who never have and probably never will have played the game. I think you can only go so far using that kind of market. A few is fine, but when 1/3 to half the league is in that situation, I have concerns. I think the NHL lost me with Nashville.

While I respect your little dream league there, you missed my point. You are looking at some of these markets in hindsight (and of course because they are all up north..). How can you say for sure hockey isn't going to work in some places? And had the league used this same philosophy, there might not be NHL teams in alot of southern and northern American cities... We might still be watching 6 teams (I know, a dream come true for alot here).
 

undraftedstlouis

Registered User
Sep 11, 2004
668
0
While I respect your little dream league there, you missed my point. You are looking at some of these markets in hindsight (and of course because they are all up north..). How can you say for sure hockey isn't going to work in some places? And had the league used this same philosophy, there might not be NHL teams in alot of southern and northern American cities... We might still be watching 6 teams (I know, a dream come true for alot here).

Yeah, I'm not exactly sure what point your going at. And personally that's not the league above that I'd create, but I put it forward trying to answer your question.

10 years ago I though technology was going to bring so many ice rinks to the US that tons of kids all across the US would grow up playing the sport. So far that's not happening. How many places in the world do you see big time pro sports succeed in areas where virtually none of the population have ever tried playing? I would think if hockey were to be able to become part of the mainstream sports culture that $40 million payrolls in teams all across the US would do the trick. If that doesn't, what will? Right now there is virtually no serious discussion of hockey by sports shows on ESPN. As a MLS fan, I really don't care what those guys say, but do realize it reflects something.

I'm not saying you can't have pro hockey in a league like the current one. Just that it would be more natural to have teams emerge from markets where locals actually play the game. You can have a 30-40 team league across North America and it may stumble along. But I don't see how the current league is healthy as a good business investment. How good is that expansion money if teams are really losing money such as the figure here? Personally I think I'd follow a 20 team league MUCH more closely.
 

undraftedstlouis

Registered User
Sep 11, 2004
668
0
I think some quoted post (bleed_oil) has been deleted, so as I say above, I'm not 100% following what you guys were debating.
 

bleed_oil

Registered User
Aug 16, 2005
3,898
40
Ok, fine I wont waste my time here.
Fact: Winnipeg is 10 times the hockey market Phoenix is or ever will be
Good day
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Stone87

Registered User
Mar 20, 2005
1,750
0
Rochester
To be fair Phoenix has never really had a chance since their team has always been pretty bad (no offense yotes fans). I don't know too many cities that will support a team that is always bad.
 

kdb209

Registered User
Jan 26, 2005
14,870
6
Yeah, I'm not exactly sure what point your going at. And personally that's not the league above that I'd create, but I put it forward trying to answer your question.

10 years ago I though technology was going to bring so many ice rinks to the US that tons of kids all across the US would grow up playing the sport. So far that's not happening. How many places in the world do you see big time pro sports succeed in areas where virtually none of the population have ever tried playing? I would think if hockey were to be able to become part of the mainstream sports culture that $40 million payrolls in teams all across the US would do the trick. If that doesn't, what will? Right now there is virtually no serious discussion of hockey by sports shows on ESPN. As a MLS fan, I really don't care what those guys say, but do realize it reflects something.

I'm not saying you can't have pro hockey in a league like the current one. Just that it would be more natural to have teams emerge from markets where locals actually play the game. You can have a 30-40 team league across North America and it may stumble along. But I don't see how the current league is healthy as a good business investment. How good is that expansion money if teams are really losing money such as the figure here? Personally I think I'd follow a 20 team league MUCH more closely.
I think you vastly overrate the importance of actually playing a sport in order to be a fan.

In the US, the VAST, VAST majority of NHL fans have never played hockey - on ice, or even just roller or street hockey.

Hell - just look at the most popular sport in the US - the NFL. How many NFL fans do you think actually play, or had played any real organized football - very few. Even if you include informal touch or flag football, it's still a minority.

If playing the sport was such an important criteria for the success of a major professional sports league, then MLS would be the most successful league in the country.
 

J-Zilla

Registered User
Jan 19, 2007
36
0
Goodie for that. :shakehead

It's xenophobes like you that are a large part of the problem. Why should a casual sports fan take an interest in the sport, when all they're going to hear from you is how they don't deserve it? And how they're not good enough to be a hockey fan?

...and I suppose Americans would never do that to Canadians. It's not like Yankee fans booed the Canadian national anthem when the Jays clinched the AL East Pennant for the first time.
 

J-Zilla

Registered User
Jan 19, 2007
36
0
To be fair Phoenix has never really had a chance since their team has always been pretty bad (no offense yotes fans). I don't know too many cities that will support a team that is always bad.

Columbus.:teach:
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->