Jarqui
Registered User
Weary said:No. The twenty-two teams were the only ones reporting revenue from their arenas. For the other eight teams it says "no arena-related allocations are required."
Here is the section from the Levitt Report:
To perform the benchmarking study, we focused on the 22 teams that play in arenas that are 50% or more owned, operated or controlled by the team, or an affiliated or related-party, and the allocation of arena revenues and expenses between hockey and non-hockey activities. It was not necessary to include the other eight teams in the benchmarking study as the arenas in which they operate are not affiliated, are leased to the teams on an arm's length basis for only hockey activities and therefore no arena-related allocations are required. For purposes of this study, we considered suites and club seats, fixed signage, arena sponsorship arrangements, arena naming rights, and fixed building costs. All other significant revenues and costs can be directly identified with hockey or non-hockey events and therefore are not required to be allocated.
The question whether the Blackhawks are in the group of 22 or the group of 8 is still open.
First words in the paragraph quoted: "To perform the benchmarking study"
Secondly: "It was not necessary to include the other eight teams in the benchmarking study as the arenas in which they operate are not affiliated, are leased to the teams on an arm's length basis for only hockey activities"
Is owning "half of the United Center", as Forbes reports Wirtz does (at the very least nearly half), "an arm's length basis" ? Doubtful given what was going on here.
Secondly, if a team leases a building for a hockey event and people show up for that event, do they just take a pass on all the luxury box revenue ? Hardly.
One of two things likely has to happen: either the team sees the luxury box revenue as money paid to them or they get a break in their lease costs which is a wash in their net revenue for the game.
Why would Reinsdorf want all of Wirtz's luxury box revenue in his BRI calculation for the NBA or tax calculation on the United Center ? Why would Wirtz want Reinsdorf to get 50% of his luxury box revenue generated by his Blackhawks when he shoves it into the United Center ? All so Wirtz can fake Goodenow out with little personal benefit to himself ? That's absurd and 180 degress off Wirtz's MO.