Teams that Lost Money in 2004

[Drury_Sakic]

Teams that lost money in 2004(According to the conservative losses estimating Forbes)

Big Market
Avalanche -1.1 million
Detroit -15.4 miillion
Dallas -0.3 miilion
Flyers -4.1 million
Rangers -3.3 million

Middle-Big Markets

Kings -5.3 million(I consider them big market, but it is SoCal)
St. Louis -28.8 miilion

Middle Markets
Devils -13.9 million (might belong in middle-big markets if it was not NJ)
Washington -14.7 million

Middle-Small Markets
Ottawa -5.0 million
Mighty Ducks -22.4
Buffalo -10.5 million

Small Market
Islanders -9.5 million (could/should be middle-big markets)
Yotes -7.8 million (got a new rink, should help a bundle)
Florida -3.7 million
Pens -0.6 million
'Cains - 18.2 million


Now, Above are all the teams that lost money in 2004...all other clubs made at least a minor profit..(if I made a mistake, someone let me know)

Make of that what you will......Just though it would be interesting to put a face to it all...

Click to read more...

 

[nyrmessier011]

Teams that lost money in 2004(According to the conservative losses estimating Forbes)

Big Market
Avalanche -1.1 million
Detroit -15.4 miillion
Dallas -0.3 miilion
Flyers -4.1 million
Rangers -3.3 million

Middle-Big Markets

Kings -5.3 million(I consider them big market, but it is SoCal)
St. Louis -28.8 miilion

Middle Markets
Devils -13.9 million (might belong in middle-big markets if it was not NJ)
Washington -14.7 million

Middle-Small Markets
Ottawa -5.0 million
Mighty Ducks -22.4
Buffalo -10.5 million

Small Market
Islanders -9.5 million (could/should be middle-big markets)
Yotes -7.8 million (got a new rink, should help a bundle)
Florida -3.7 million
Pens -0.6 million
'Cains - 18.2 million


Now, Above are all the teams that lost money in 2004...all other clubs made at least a minor profit..(if I made a mistake, someone let me know)

Make of that what you will......Just though it would be interesting to put a face to it all...

every big market team overspent and the owners could easily police themselves without a hard cap...LA is in california..hockey in california...The Devils will always have a hard time selling with NYR/NYI/PHILY so close. Anaheim, Phoenix, Florida, Carolina should not even exist. How many teams does that leave now?

 

[blamebettman*]

how would forbes know? they didn't audit the NHLs books.

 

[Levitate]

washington is a big market...just maybe not for hockey

 

[futurcorerock]

washington is a big market...just maybe not for hockey

...so, they're small market?

 

[bladoww]

every big market team overspent and the owners could easily police themselves without a hard cap...LA is in california..hockey in california...The Devils will always have a hard time selling with NYR/NYI/PHILY so close. Anaheim, Phoenix, Florida, Carolina should not even exist. How many teams does that leave now?

Here we go again with the anti-hockey in hot weather comments...

 

[Crazy_Ike]

Worth mentioning as well that some markets (like Edmonton, if we trust that source) only avoided losing money by keeping their payroll rock bottom where they couldn't compete for players.

As the OP said, though... very conservative estimate from Forbes, who never looked at the books.

 

[Johnnybegood13]

Interesting that you consider Ottawa a middle-small market when everyone says Edmonton and Calgary are Small markets.

Aren't they roughly the same size

 

[Johnnybegood13]

I just checked:

1 Toronto ONT 5,202,300
2 Montréal QUE 3,607,200
3 Vancouver BC 2,173,100
4 Ottawa ONT 1,145,500
5 Calgary ALTA 1,037,100
6 Edmonton ALTA 1,001,600
7 Québec QUE 710,800
8 Hamilton ONT 710,100
9 Winnipeg MAN 702,400
10 London ONT 459,600
11 Kitchener ONT 450,000
12 St. Catharines ONT 394,900
13 Halifax NS 379,800
14 Windsor ONT 330,900
15 Victoria BC 330,200
16 Oshawa ONT 329,000
17 Saskatoon SASK 234,000
18 Regina SASK 198,600
19 St. John's NFLD 179,900
20 Sherbrooke QUE 162,300
21 Sudbury ONT 161,100
22 Abbotsford BC 157,600
23 Kingston ONT 156,500
24 Saguenay QUE 154,200

Close enough for me

 

[Mess]

Interestingly ..

The teams that have been reported to be the strongest supporters of Bettman and a Lower Hard Cap :

Chicago, Boston, Calgary, Edmonton, Nashville .. all are not on the losing list ..

 

[dolfanar]

Interestingly ..

The teams that have been reported to be the strongest supporters of Bettman and a Lower Hard Cap :

Chicago, Boston, Calgary, Edmonton, Nashville .. all are not on the losing list ..

Not ont he revenue losing list, but then they are among the most fiscally responsible... which makes LOADS of sense. This is the smart business owners finally reigning in on the spend and burners.

It's funny, but of those teams, I am a bit surprised by how little Florida lost... hmmm.

Anaheim and Carolina are pretty sore eyes. Poor teams, poor attendance, poor economics...

St. Louis is VERY scary. That team nearly died once...

 

[mooseOAK*]

Interestingly ..

The teams that have been reported to be the strongest supporters of Bettman and a Lower Hard Cap :

Chicago, Boston, Calgary, Edmonton, Nashville .. all are not on the losing list ..

Reported by who?

In order for the lockout to go this long then that list has to have many more names.

 

[MacDaddy TLC*]

Notice on that list that only Ottawa lost money of the 6 located in Canada.

Could you please provide a link to the site where you found these numbers? I have been looking for about a month to no avail.

Thanks

 

[Drury_Sakic]

Reported by who?

In order for the lockout to go this long then that list has to have many more names.

As reported by Forbes..

http://www.forbes.com/finance/lists...ssListType=Misc&uniqueId=310760&datatype=Misc

A few notes about the numbers..

They are conservative from the money lost point...their numbers are roughly 2/3rds of what the NHL claimed to have lost.....

But, that said, its not like Forbes is a 2nd rate company....their data is usually good....


I don't totally believe the NHL, as its in their best interest to inflate their numbers(not that I believe they are outright lying, but that they streatched them whenever possible)..

Plus, these are just one years numbers....so...Take Calgary...they turned a small profit according to Forbes, but thats with them playing 4 rounds of hockey....minus an improbable playoff run, their losses would have been quite large.. the opposite occures for Colorado, Detriot, and Dallas... if those teams would have pulled into the next round(or not had 2 8 million goaltenders)..they would have made profits...


Odds are you could average the NHL/Leveit numbers and the Forbes numbers and come out close to actual losses...





Another thing to look at regarding ALL the numbers out there is that there are some money factors not counted in... As in the case of Colorado, 10-15 million dollars of their spendings went into creating Kronke's network, so take that off of the expences of the Avs and they actually made somewhere in the 9-10 million dollar mark(long term, they will profit from not outsourcing local broadcasting rights and new Ad income).....

 

[chriss_co]

Interestingly ..

The teams that have been reported to be the strongest supporters of Bettman and a Lower Hard Cap :

Chicago, Boston, Calgary, Edmonton, Nashville .. all are not on the losing list ..

Calgary would have lost millions this year had they not made the playoffs. It wasn't until the 1st several games against San Jose that they turned a profit.

I should also mention that Calgary maximized all of their playoff home appearances in the postseason. There were 3 home games per series for all 4 series.

So basically, it took Calgary 6-7 playoff games to breakeven.

 

[Dave is a killer]

Calgary would have lost millions this year had they not made the playoffs. It wasn't until the 1st several games against San Jose that they turned a profit.

I should also mention that Calgary maximized all of their playoff home appearances in the postseason. There were 3 home games per series for all 4 series.

So basically, it took Calgary 6-7 playoff games to breakeven.

which should tell you something about the current CBA system

 

[Scoogs]

Even though I think it sucks... I think it's in the best interest of the NHL to do it.. But I mean, if that many teams are losing money... then that should really tell you that this league was dying... And as of now, still is.

 

[DW3]

It's funny, but of those teams, I am a bit surprised by how little Florida lost... hmmm.

Why? They don't have any really big stars (One of the youngest teams in the NHL), therefore no high $$ saleries. They're rebuilding, so they have a bunch of hot youngsters who are starting to play like older players, but at 1/2 the price. Add to this there was a large number of sellouts this season, shows why they didn't really lose that much.

Also, Sunrise is basically a suburb of Miami, how does that make it small market?

 

[ColoradoHockeyFan]

Teams that lost money in 2004(According to the conservative losses estimating Forbes)

Big Market
Avalanche -1.1 million

What exactly is the definition of "big market" here? The entire six-county area that includes and surrounds Denver-Boulder has only, what, 2.2 million people, yet the Avs are listed among the biggest group in terms of market size.

 

[Chileiceman]

What exactly is the definition of "big market" here? The entire six-county area that includes and surrounds Denver-Boulder has only, what, 2.2 million people, yet the Avs are listed among the biggest group in terms of market size.

i think his market sizes are based on payroll.

 

[Drury_Sakic]

I tried to take in to account a few things..

A)Payroll
B)How often the team makes playoffs
C)Location
D)Population in that Location
E)Hockeyablititermary of that market(its a word damn it!)
F)Hockey teams Owners spending ablitity and what they Own

Which is how Denver, a team not super strong in the D catagory is in the top, while LA slips to the 2nd catagory(due to its location in SoCal and a slightly tight owner) and why Florida slips into the small market( It takes a hit in A,B,E, F,)

Markets can change...in 5 years, Florida could be a medium-big hockey market if they keep their talent and start making the playoffs....Just as if the Avalanche totally stop spending and missed the playoffs all 5 years, they would slip to a medium-small market.

But yeah.. the most important factors in my breakdown is Payroll and how willing/able an owner is to spend...

its not cast in stone, just one guys opinion...

 

[mooseOAK*]

What exactly is the definition of "big market" here? The entire six-county area that includes and surrounds Denver-Boulder has only, what, 2.2 million people, yet the Avs are listed among the biggest group in terms of market size.

The Denver area has never had to experience a bad hockey team, how good the market is won't be determined until that happens for a few years in a row.

But people do point to it as a big market team even though it really isn't.

 

[Boltsfan2029]

But, that said, its not like Forbes is a 2nd rate company....their data is usually good....

Is this info gleaned from the report that Forbes itself says was based on assumptions because they didn't have access to the teams' financial information?

 

[R0CKET]

Here we go again with the anti-hockey in hot weather comments...

We here in SoCal refer to it as the Harrold Ballard school if ignorance.

 

[mooseOAK*]

As reported by Forbes..

http://www.forbes.com/finance/lists...ssListType=Misc&uniqueId=310760&datatype=Misc

A few notes about the numbers..

They are conservative from the money lost point...their numbers are roughly 2/3rds of what the NHL claimed to have lost.....

But, that said, its not like Forbes is a 2nd rate company....their data is usually good....


I don't totally believe the NHL, as its in their best interest to inflate their numbers(not that I believe they are outright lying, but that they streatched them whenever possible)..

Plus, these are just one years numbers....so...Take Calgary...they turned a small profit according to Forbes, but thats with them playing 4 rounds of hockey....minus an improbable playoff run, their losses would have been quite large.. the opposite occures for Colorado, Detriot, and Dallas... if those teams would have pulled into the next round(or not had 2 8 million goaltenders)..they would have made profits...


Odds are you could average the NHL/Leveit numbers and the Forbes numbers and come out close to actual losses...





Another thing to look at regarding ALL the numbers out there is that there are some money factors not counted in... As in the case of Colorado, 10-15 million dollars of their spendings went into creating Kronke's network, so take that off of the expences of the Avs and they actually made somewhere in the 9-10 million dollar mark(long term, they will profit from not outsourcing local broadcasting rights and new Ad income).....

That wasn't the answer to my question, it was who was reporting the names of teams forcing the lockout.

Anyway, I would think that the Kronke's would be a little upset if the lockout was costing them that huge of a profit. But it isn't.