Great day at San Quentin!! ☀️ pic.twitter.com/cS57i8qpys— Tommy Thompson (@tomthom11) October 28, 2019
Looks like they've definitely kissed and made up. Represent for the South Bay, @SanJoseStateFB. #BeatBoise | #BayAreaUnite pic.twitter.com/zmGV9YSi7B— San Jose Earthquakes (@SJEarthquakes) October 31, 2019
Forbes ranks the Earthquakes as the 16th most valuable MLS team at $275 million. Values across the league have surged 30%.
Forbes? Is that journalism, or hot takes? https://www.forbes.com/sites/curtis...flawed-6-2-team-youve-ever-seen/#3b8c52a42634
Hey Forbes. Remember that time the Broncos started 6-0 and ended 8-8? https://www.ign.com/boards/threads/...-broncos-started-6-0-and-ended-8-8.453472121/
How, or why, is Cincinnati valued higher than SJ? If market has anything to do with Forbes numbers (since apparently real estate and stadiums don't), then we should easily be top 5 (Silicon Valley, Bay Area). Doesn't make sense IMHO..
Or perhaps the fact that Cincinnati fans have only had to put up with one year of futility compared to our ten years may factor into it...
Cincinnati revenue is listed as "n/a", and a $10 million delta between relative values suggests a heckuva lot of merchandise sales. As I suggested earlier, the valuations are damn lies and statistics -- with a side of ranch dressing.
Not that Fisher will sell anytime soon (unfortunately), but if the Quakes were put on the market today I say they would fetch at least a cool $300 million easily (team plus stadium, land/footprint). Just my opinion of course. Said it once and I'll say it again: Fisher should just deed the Quakes (including stake in MLS/SUM) to the Giants for the right to move A's to SJ (which is really what he and Wolff wanted in the first place). $275 million value (for the Giants to either flip or run the Quakes franchise themself) not a bad price for SJ/SCCo. What do you say John?!...
It says our revenue is $35M and we spent $40M to get that. Where the heck are we spending $40M a year? Our player salaries are just over $9M. Is the value to take care of the stadium included but not the value to the stadium? BTW, when you have no Jersey or Stadium sponsor, you have no one to blame but yourself for losing money.
The costs associated with building the stadium are probably being amortized over a specific time period. You don't expense an asset as you build it. Accounting 101!
Its striking how few teams are making money. It's going to make the CBA negotiations that much harder.
An Athletic article pointed out that SUM makes a lot of money for MLS owners and has a huge valuation. Plus all the special districts that the clubs have gotten with their new stadiums reaps in more money in tax benefits, retail & real estate income, etc. I hope the MLSPA has the smarts to understand and demand to know how all that works. MLS owners pleading poverty is modern mythology.
Sooner or later, there will be no more expansion clubs. Not unless they break up into 3-4 leagues. I can't believe potential MLS owners will want small market clubs. For this area, the only 3 largest cities are San Jose, San Francisco and the Oakland East Bay Area. Oakland seems to be coming up with big plans although no one has really emerged yet. I can't imagine SF ever getting a stadium and that only leaves San Jose. I'm sure there would be a high demand for an owner unless the league and teams fold or start relocating. Of course it would all depend on Fisher wanting to sell.