SUM Revenues

The main reason I wanted to see that document (although it has a ton of other good info) was because of this breakdown sheet that gets posted around in bigsoccer and blogs:

http://vancouversouthsiders.ca/forum/index.php?p=/discussion/1419/mls-revenue-breakdown

it is said to be from KC stadium related documents but now that I looked at it, it's clearly not from that KC study.
Well, at least not the parts that I was mostly interested in (concessions, media sharing, shirt sponsorships, merchandise).

Any idea where that breakdown comes from?

Some of those numbers have drifted around various websites, but I've never seen them attributed to an acutal source so it's impossible to judge how accurate they may be.

For the record, there are four feasibility studies that I'm aware of that were done for local governments with the cooperation of an MLS team and MLS itself -- Kansas City, Portland, San Jose and DC United. Of those, the Portland and KC study have the most detailed financial information, although the San Jose study does talk about the capital call and notes that much of the payrolls were funded via the capital call. Personally, I find the DC United study the least helpful because it really focuses on the economic impact of an MLS team to a local community using various multipliers. Finally, several newspapers have reported pieces of information over the years -- the Columbus Dispatch in particular -- that are helpful. What distinguishes these four feasibility studies and the Dispatch articles from the blogs on this topic is that they had access to information provided by the teams -- the are far better sourced than some of the blogs. (Fake Sigi likewise has his numbers sourced in this thread to SUM itself).

Back to the numbers you linked, some of the figures on that chart are clearly from the KC study, and there is a subtle "marker" that identifies it. Several MLS sources note the split of gate receipts between the I/O and the league, but usually it's stated that the I/O keeps two-thirds of the ticket revenue. The KC study is the only source that is more specific and uses the figure based on 70% of the revenue -- when you see the 70/30 percent figure used without attribution, the only source out there for that is CSL study for Johnson County.

As for the revenue from concessions and merchandise, both the KC and Portland studies talk about the cost of merchandise and enable you to net those costs out of the total sales figures -- personally I'd go with those as the percentages listed in the table aren't (and cannot be) the same from team to team, even season to season depending on the cost of the food, etc.

But the most interesting number in that table is the split of the national TV revenue between MLS and the I/Os -- it says the I/Os get 1/19th of 45.2% and MLS, LLC gets 54.8%. Again, this was mentioned in a thread not too long ago, but I've never seen the source for it. As I posted earlier, I strongly suspect that TV money is divided between SUM and MLS, LLC and these percentages are so specific it seems probable they came from somewhere (as opposed to an educated guess made by a fan on a forum), but absent some source for these percentages, there is simply no way to know if they are accurate.

If I had a choice I'd rather see a MLS cash flow statement. I have a strong feeling franchises are negative operating cash flow.

there was also a report for Toronto city council (http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/2005/agendas/council/cc051026/pof9rpt/cl036.pdf).
It's not a study of MLS-teams relationship specifically, it's very team-stadium-city and cash/obligations oriented.
But it does have some interesting bits.

re the spreadsheet - besides the figures you mentioned, I was also surprised by the "MLS: Remaining" entries when it comes to concessions and merchandise.

When it comes to in-stadium merchandise and concessions sales, I always assumed that the team/operator gets a piece and that's it. The team gets a certain % of gross sales (25% per Toronto report, 30% per Portland, it possibly differs team to team). And then the other 70% or 75% or whatever goes to cover expenses, or in case of concessionaire goes to concessionaire, or to the city (if it's in the stadium rent agreement), etc.
But these numbers suggested something different - that MLS always gets a piece of it as well.
When it comes to out-of-stadium sales (online, general stores, etc), I'm sure MLS gets a piece, directly or through SUM.
But this was the first time I saw someone suggest that teams/operators share their in-stadium merchandise/concessions sales with the league. And it's hard to dismiss when it's allegedly based on some specific KC stadium document.

But I guess if this spreadsheet isn't based on any specific single document, it's likely just a mistake by the fan who first made it.