We or terry will?
TPegs will shell out close to 8 million next year on players who have been bought out, and coaches/execs who have been let go.We don’t pay him anything. It’s not our money and it doesn’t count on our teams cap.
I can think of nothing less important to us than Ehrhoff’s buyout.
I just wish I could find a way to personally benefit from how cavalier TPegs is about cash money.TPegs will shell out close to 8 million next year on players who have been bought out, and coaches/execs who have been let go.
A million here, a million there, soon we're talking about real money, even for that family.
Sorry, the fiscal dysfunction of the Sabres since the Pegulas bought the team has always bothered me. I personally like my favorite sports franchise to operate near the black, rather than rely on tens of millions in capital infusions by its owners to meet operating expenses. One approach just seems more sustainable than the other.
Sabres tickets are now free?
Cable tv is now free?
The goods and services provided by Sabres advertisers are now free?
The tax reductions sports teams enjoy aren't factored into individual tax bills?
We pay.
And pay.
TPegs will shell out close to 8 million next year on players who have been bought out, and coaches/execs who have been let go.
A million here, a million there, soon we're talking about real money, even for that family.
Sorry, the fiscal dysfunction of the Sabres since the Pegulas bought the team has always bothered me. I personally like my favorite sports franchise to operate near the black, rather than rely on tens of millions in capital infusions by its owners to meet operating expenses. One approach just seems more sustainable than the other.
TPegs will shell out close to 8 million next year on players who have been bought out, and coaches/execs who have been let go.
A million here, a million there, soon we're talking about real money, even for that family.
Sorry, the fiscal dysfunction of the Sabres since the Pegulas bought the team has always bothered me. I personally like my favorite sports franchise to operate near the black, rather than rely on tens of millions in capital infusions by its owners to meet operating expenses. One approach just seems more sustainable than the other.
Are you a new fan because the bolded is laughable coming from any long time fan of this team. From Knox's largesse through the Rigas bankruptcy this team was always losing money.The only time this team theoretically broke even was during the Golisano budget years coming out of a bankruptcy and a reshuffling of the financial order with the CBA.
The Sabres lost 13 million last year -- second worst behind Arizona -- on revs of 120 million (according to Forbes article). How much money on their side hustles are the Pegualas making in downtown Buffalo that can offset this kind of year in, year out cash bleed? The whole point is I don't want to revisit the Knox/Rigas years of huge losses and possible franchise relocation. They way you do that is by turning the team into a steady money making machine, so that regardless of what comes the Pegula's way -- divorce, death, financial setback -- the team remains on a robust footing.
In the era of salary caps and revenue sharing, the Sabres could easily reach a level where they remain profitable year in year out. Not mad profits, but profitable. That's how you build long term franchise stability. Considering 2/3 of the 13 million in losses are from paying players/coaches/execs who are no longer with the team, I think it's obvious that most of our financial problems are self inflicted and thus fixable. Other teams in similarly sized markets and with comparable revenues are doing much better than us, even without playoff money. What you're saying can't exist here already exists elsewhere.You are missing the fact that the Sabres in and of themselves will never be a money making machine. After the bankruptcy with much of the debt washed away and a new CBA changing the financial landscape, they were roughly breaking even under Golisano as a budget team getting revenue sharing. You really want the team run like that right now? We don't have the money locally for the Sabres themselves to be a money making machine. We just don't have the corporate base for the suites and luxury boxes that drives that type of revenue. The Sabres are basically a lost leader for everything else around them (all other events at the Arena, Harborcenter, etc). I'm fairly confident the totality of the Pegula empire downtown (and pre Bills) was making money but thats rarely how they list things in those Forbes reports. Thats the best way for a Sabres owner to make money off the team, outside of the profit they make from selling it.
You're essentially asking for a model that has never existed here and can't really exist. A Sabres team that as a stand alone entity can be a money making machine.
They are also missing out on a ton of revenue from the team sucking as bad as they have the last several years. Get a better run team that has success and the buyouts you reference will go away and more revenue will pour in.
In the era of salary caps and revenue sharing, the Sabres could easily reach a level where they remain profitable year in year out. Not mad profits, but profitable. That's how you build long term franchise stability. Considering 2/3 of the 13 million in losses are from paying players/coaches/execs who are no longer with the team, I think it's obvious that most of our financial problems are self inflicted and thus fixable. Other teams in similarly sized markets and with comparable revenues are doing much better than us, even without playoff money. What you're saying can't exist here already exists elsewhere.
Pegula still owns substantial holdings in the energy industry, specifically natural gas and the condensate (oil slurry from NG wells). These holdings include lease rights for drilling among other things. You really can't get a concrete number on that until the well is drilled and producing.They're not terrible. If you look at EBITDA based on Forbes, they're probably closed to on the black.
Who knows what all these Pegula side hustles are making.
You mean speculation and assumptions? That's what the rest of your post #1049 amounted to. No, I'm not interested in making up stuff and then getting upset about it, or using it as evidence that someone is an idiot.
What speculation/what assumption?
Fact: Botts protected Kane in expansion
Fact: Botts never broached extension negotiations with Kane's agent
Fact: Botts didn't trade Kane when he was on fire
Fact: Botts traded Kane at his lowest valued point
Responses in bold.What speculation/what assumption?
Fact: Botts protected Kane in expansion
Fact: Botts never broached extension negotiations with Kane's agent
Do you actually know that?
Fact: Botts didn't trade Kane when he was on fire
Doesn't mean he didn't try.
Fact: Botts traded Kane at his lowest valued point
Again, doesn't mean he didn't try to earlier.
Responses in bold.
I have a hard time blaming Botts for not getting more for Kane. You can only get as much as someone will give you and are we really trying to argue that teams were lining up to trade for Evander Kane? I don't see it.
I have a hard time blaming Botts for not getting more for Kane. You can only get as much as someone will give you and are we really trying to argue that teams were lining up to trade for Evander Kane? I don't see it.
GMs were calling off the hook hoping to acquire a power forward that had been 1) singled out from his prior team 2) missed practice for another sports event 3) assaulted a female at a bar and 4) possibly sexually assaulted another female in an incident that would never be prosecuted. All kinds of high draft picks and top prospects are thrown at the chance to get a player with that level of baggage. Buuuut..."Botts gonna Botts #AMIRIGHT???" Botterill couldn't possibly have ruined Kane's trade value any more than Kane already had.
1) It was never reported that Kane had lockerroom issues in Buffalo. Not sure how relevant his issues with WPG would be 2+ years later.
2) PRACTICE?! We talking 'bout PRACTICE?
3) Charges were dropped
4) He was investigated. Prosecutors never brought charges.
All told that level of baggage might be enough to put a small dent in his trade value. It obviously didn't stop the Sharks from signing him to a 7x7 deal.
They're not terrible. If you look at EBITDA based on Forbes, they're probably closed to on the black.
Who knows what all these Pegula side hustles are making.