Re: 350 Million Dlrs on 9 years???? I imagine a fairly large part of those losses was for the acquisition of assets that will bring in money for some time to come. Perfect example...SUM broadcast rights to 2006 World Cup, presumably the cost figures into that number but none of the forthcoming income. I also bet the cost of building Crew Stasium and HDC are in tha figure, and work on Frisco...once they're built though, they bring money in.
Re: 350 Million Dlrs on 9 years???? While MLS has to "buy" the time from ABC/ESPN2 I understand they get all ad revenue from those time slots and I understand with that model, SUM actually makes money on MLS broadcasts.
Re: 350 Million Dlrs on 9 years???? But sometimes half the commercials are "MLS" commercials. Don't think CCS, HDC, and Frisco are included in these #'s. There not MLS owned, their expenditure was by AEG/HSG directly. Not 100% sure though. I read in one article (seemed reliable) that Adidas was taking over p40 from Nike (really don't remember where). Not 100% sure about this either, but it makes sense given Adidas' new role vs. Nike.
Re: 350 Million Dlrs on 9 years???? If you read Grant Wahl's article on si.com I think he said Nike just re-uped their deal with US Soccer and this includes P-40 since it has always technically been a US Soccer thing.
Re: 350 Million Dlrs on 9 years???? I hope so but that's an inference. But I read that "adidas" was "taking over" it somewhere. I'm not sure either way, hopefully Nike money will still be there. I don't remember if Nike covers their salaries or just their tuition packages, If salaries that's >30 * 24k=720k and more if they cover the boosts Countess and several other p40s have over the baseline. I'm sure their stilling something towards Adu, not sure how much.
Re: 350 Million Dlrs on 9 years???? I don't think half of the commercials are MLS commercials. In all the broadcasts I've seen, there's been a MLS commercial before the game and a MLS commercial at halftime. The rest are their official sponsors who I understand still have to pay ad time for those commercials which is where SUM makes it's money. Plus Radio Shack paid SUM for the rights to call ESPN2 broadcast "Radio Shack Game of the week" or somthing like that. MLS may not be getting the large amount of money thrown at them like other American sports, but through SUM they're finding new ways to get Revenue from TV time. In fact, Arena Football League and NBC liked SUM's model so well they copied the deal in their Sunday TV deal, except I believe NBC actually does get some of AFL's ad money. A modification of thr SUM model is also what ABC/ESPN wants to get the NHL in as well. Your right on with the stadiums. Which is also why ancillary revenue like concerts, Nats games, USOC, HS Football, Rugby ect ect. go to HSG and AEG and not MLS. As I understand it, MLS only gets a part of the revenue from MLS games and concessions and parking from those games.
Just pointed out the MLS commercials (I've seen more than a couple for some games) to show that MLS broadcasts probably aren't breaking even yet. NHL and Arena Football would much rather have NFL-like deals than MLS-like deals, they just accepted the MLS-like structured deal cause they wanted on network TV/ESPN. I think MLS should hope for NFL-like revenue someday and not desire what NHL/AFL settled for. It sounds like you believe TV broadcasts make MLS money, I don't think that's the case yet. But that's ok. I'm glad MLS is willing to lose a little money to have weekly basic cable broadcasts with MLS Cup/All-star game on ABC. If you add in the SUM deal that included World Cup, etc with MLS, then overall TV deals might be a net profitable thing. Just cause commercials are sold, doesn't mean they necessarily cover the time-buying fee.
Everything I've heard says they DO make money on their time-buys. It doesn't even approach what the Networks give NFL, but they do come out of it with paying off the time they bought and a some money for SUM caufers. Also, NFL type deals are dead; they're so 90s it wears flannel. NBC won't even go by them anymore which is why they lost NFL and NBA and picked up the ass end of NASCAR. It's why NBA had to go to ABC/ESPN and the deal didn't even begin to approach their NBC deal. It's the reason NHL is locked out right now. When MLB comes up with FOX and ESPN they're probably in the same boat. I understand the same is true in Europe. The conglomerates that own Networks now can't find a way to justify the high cost to relatively low ratings of most sports broadcasts. That means the sports world is going to have to find new ways to get TV revenue in and SUM and MLS is at the forefront of that.
Re: 350 Million Dlrs on 9 years???? This is true to the extent the expected future cash flows are positive, which none of us can predict. If a franchise has negative present value of cash flows, it doesn't have any value. In other words, a franchise may not be worth 10 million. That's what MLS says you have to pay to buy in. For all we know it could be -5 million. If I sell a franchise and I get 10 million in return from the new investor, then it definitely is worth 10 million because that's my riskless return. Does anyone know what an exiting investor gets?
Re: 350 Million Dlrs on 9 years???? Best example. NY Yankees used to be on MSG they probably got upwards of 30 million a year from MSG for tv rights. The Boss creates YES network pays the yankees $1 a year for TV rights and voila the yanks make $30 million less than they used to. I am not saying this happened but I believed it was a stumbling block to real revenue sharing for baseball since the Dodger and Yankees basically owned their own TV networks at the time (when fOX owned LA).
Re: 350 Million Dlrs on 9 years???? Best example. NY Yankees used to be on MSG they probably got upwards of 30 million a year from MSG for tv rights. The Boss creates YES network pays the yankees $1 a year for TV rights and voila the yanks make $30 million less than they used to. I am not saying this happened but I believed it was a stumbling block to real revenue sharing for baseball since the Dodger and Yankees basically owned their own TV networks at the time (when fOX owned LA).
Re: 350 Million Dlrs on 9 years???? This is way off topic but this league doesn't need any more development players/scrubs
Re: 350 Million Dlrs on 9 years???? Yes it does. Opinion about this could go back and forth forever, it's all opinion. For $850 per month trial as many as you can and by age 24 you'll know if they have pro potential. A few years ago players like Josh Gros, Andy Dorman, Jordan Cila, and Jeff Parke probably would have been shut out of MLS. I found the p40/adidas link posted again in the DC United Moreno Transactions thread: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2004/writers/grant_wahl/10/22/adidas.deal/index.html
Re: 350 Million Dlrs on 9 years???? You can name all the quality ones you want but for every good one there are about ten or really bad ones. Lots of players who don't go straight into MLS go to the A-League and if they are good there end up in MLS later so that argument about them being shut out simply doesn't wash MLS needs to realise that it needs to dvelop its own talent and not allow others to do it for them if it wants to avoid having a substandard product. More development player means a lower talent level. I want to know who these 40 players are who aren't in the league now that we are missing out on seeing? They need to concentrate on bringing in the quality players from the A-League who stay there because they get paid more there. I don't think this league needs to be adding players who will bring talent level down
Re: 350 Million Dlrs on 9 years???? Let's say you're casting a play. You have two big-name stars lined up. Now you need someone to fill the off-lead roles. Do you just call up the first person you can find? No. You have an audition. And that's the way talent pools work in pretty much every field of endeavor. That's why baseball and hockey have minor leagues. That's why English teams have rosters that rival college lacrosse teams in size -- the 30th guy on Man U's roster right now could be the next Paul Scholes or he could wash out of the game. Not if they're on the bench.
Re: 350 Million Dlrs on 9 years???? I have no faith in the A-League for player development. Semi-pro is not the way I want potential MLS players to go. MLS needs to develop its own talent? That statement makes no sense to me since you seem to be advocating less development spots and more players to the A-League? Maybe lower talent level in the dev's, but not for the team. Adding more dev players doesn't mean they're playing first team matches. Adding more dev spots is more to accomodate the better younger talent out there over several years, not 40 players out there right now. It's mostly to gain the ability to have reserve matches. Again, how do they bring the talent level down by taking up roster spots 25-28? MLS can't afford to compete with the A-League for their starters tio put them in "dev" positions. Few players out of college will choose better A-Leauge offers over dev pay cause most want to be in the MLS system. It's too late for the 25-30 y/o A-Leaguers, they're developed already. MLS doesn't need them. MLS needs to focus on drawing in the 18-23 y/o's. That's my opinion. edit: 1 quality for 10 bad players, that's fine with me. that's 1 quality player not lost. these are small $$$ contracts
Re: 350 Million Dlrs on 9 years???? Let me clarify this point a bit-- if you're a TV network, you definately want the arrangement where you don't pay a rights fee, yet you get some (any) revenue. But if you're the league on the other hand, you can do better for yourself.
Re: 350 Million Dlrs on 9 years???? exactly, and that's why it's a good system. you can take 100's of chances at $ 1,000 per month, compared to 1 or 2 chances on large $$$ salaries.
Re: 350 Million Dlrs on 9 years???? I am with you. But unlike Man U the guy on the end of the bench in MLS will get first team minutes. I don't buy this argument that guys deserve "a shot" in MLS. If they want "a shot" give it to them in the A-League. There are many good players down there that they can test themselves against. If the excel MLS will come a knocking like they have in the past. But they don't stay on the bench. They get on the field when squads get depleted. And it is painful to watch.
Re: 350 Million Dlrs on 9 years???? 1. Thankfully your faith doesn't play a part in it since so many players come from the A-League to MLS 2. A-League is not semi pro. 3. How can you say you don't want MLS potential players to go semi pro when so many actual MLS players are essentially semi pro. Do people think mike nugent retired for nothing. He wasn't making any money. Kenny Arena and all the development palyers in this league are semi pro and they all play in MLS. Because grabbing onto 20 something year old players and putting them up against professionals is not talent development even if you put the word "developmental" in their titles. You don't start talent development AFTER a layer turns 20. There is a reason there is a Bradenton for 15-16 year olds and not one for 21-22 year olds. Developmental players are roster filler for the most part. Someone needs to explain to me what talent is being developed in Kenny Arena and Tim Regan. Talent development means getting next to kdis nad trying to teach them somethings about the game not getting next to adults and trying to teach them something. Maybe in theory but not in reality Swed. These people play when teams are shorthanded as well as other times. When there are injureies or players are away with the national teams. Fine then say that. They want to have reserve matches. But I want to see what shape this league takes first. but it doesn't change the fact the talent level will go down. You ever heard of the law of diminishing returns? I know its your opinion but please allow me to say that if you think the only palyers in the a-league are 30 year olds who its too late for, your opinion is based on ignorance. If MLS doesn't need them why do they keep signing them. Like Testo DeRosario, Washington, Hendrikson. 1. That may be fine with you but it is not fine with a lot of people. 2. At some point you are going to have to prove this or stop saying it. There is nothing to indicate what you are saying. Show us that players who don't sign as dev players get lost in the system or stop saying it.
Re: 350 Million Dlrs on 9 years???? First of this doesn't make any damn sense since 1. There are only 4 developmental spots on teams and 20 spots for players who make a lot more than that 2. You can still get rid of the dev spots keep the salry cap and allow teams to be creative with their signings at the same $1.7 million per team. You end with the same number of players but higher quality players most likely. 3. You sound like Bush supporter befor the war. Are there only 2 choices paying larg esalries or paying players pennies? Secondly is this the way to try to make this the best soccer league we can possibly be? Chasing down cheap players just because they are cheap?
Re: 350 Million Dlrs on 9 years???? It may lose money on paper for that fiscal year if the value increase is not reflected in any financial report I would imagine. I suppose that extra value could almost be considered like "equity", but that might be pushing it. I would imagine they only stick with real, actual figures, and leave the projected "values" out of it for now. Kind of like "a bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush" sort of thing. Could be wrong, but hey, wouldnt be the first time. Speaking of 2 in the bush, you mentioned frisco when talking about SSS's. Arent metrostars SET on Harrisson? So theres another... and DCU is moving closer and closer to poplar point. At this point things are looking pretty good for Poplar Point to actually get built. So theres potentailly up to 2 more you can ad to the SSS list.
Re: 350 Million Dlrs on 9 years???? What? An MLS francise is worth as much as someone is willing to pay for it. This price is based on assests, current profitability, and the probability of future profits and their amounts. I've read that the HDC made 8 million dollars on non-MLS events yet that revenue is seperate from Galaxy revenue and it goes to AEG. The profitability of a sports franchise is very difficult to figure out because of interesting acounting and umbrela organizational schemes. Hiding a teams profitability is a great way to get a new stadium and to negotiate a collective bargaining agreement with the players union. A 3.5 million dollar "loss" per season for a team over its first ten years that is owned by a billionaire is extremely manageable considering that you can divert related revenue to keep salaries at an extremely low level. I'm almost certain that Phil didn't lose any money on MLS last year. Saying that no one can predict future cash flow is interesting; I would say no one can accurately predict future cash flow but it doesn't stop people from doing it and some, Warren Buffet, are quite succesfull. Business acquesitions are based on predicting the posibility of future profit, it's how a growth based capitalist market system works. "If a franchise has negative present value of cash flows, it doesn't have any value.", wow can you concieve of any situation where this statement is false? I sure can. If a franchise has assets it has value. What if DC bought Robinho for 10 million dollars, I know it's low, and so for that year they had 10 million in debt. Then would DC have no value? I would say they have value in that they can turn around and sell Robinho, if he plays as well as he can, for 20 million not to mention Freddy.
Re: 350 Million Dlrs on 9 years???? Prove what. This isn't a math problem or logic puzzle. If players get lost in the system how do we know who they are? What players has the A-League developed? Getting cut from MLS and spending a few months on an A-League team before bouncing back is different. I can tell you how every MLS player got into the league. Few quality players spent more than 2 years in the A-League first.