I posted this is the Metro's Forum, but really most of it belongs here. Here's my view on who has a chance to run in the black next year: 2003 Outlook C'Bus -- No reason that they shouldn't make a profit this year. Dallas -- Hard to tell with stadium situation Chicago -- See Dallas. KC -- If they keep increasing attendance, and getting the season tix #'s Hunt wants, they could make a profit. NE -- Another solid season and maybe a quick start this year will get the always dependable Revs fans back in droves, they have a chance at running in the black if they can get solid attendance early on in the season and continue it throughout the season. LA -- Definite chance to go in the black if all things with the new stadium work out smoothly. The accounting of things definitely depends though too. Will Anschutz just write off the Stadium as a personal expense, or will they be amortizing it over time? Colorado -- They didn't make a profit with the highest attendance avg. in the league last year, and I think theie attendance will be down from last year's avg. (artificially inflated with all the big double headers), so no profit in Denver. San Jose -- If they have solid attendance from the get-go, they could get close, but I think they'll still be in the red next year. Metros -- No chance for a profit next year. D.C. -- I'm not too familiar with their lease issues, but if they have a decent season and they get their attendance level's up to where they used to be, there could be a chance. So I would say 4 out of 10 probably have little to no chance of making a profit, 3 could make a profit if they see decent attendance's, and they other 3 would need a lot of things to fall into place to see a profit, but there's still a chance.
I know the Metros have the worst lease in the league, but when you say "no chance" I'm curious as to what you do expect. I would think with Maximum Bob at the helm, and a host of good new players coming in to go with what looks like a rededicated Cletus, the Metros should put together an interesting team that I would think would draw well. No?
the metros lead the league in losses last year, somewhere in the $4-6 million range (it was reported). highly doubtful they can overcome their insipid lease and other factors. the dc lease is pretty bad too if i recall correctly. how is that season ticket drive going in kc, anyway?
Interesting post. I'm curious about your comment re: the Rapids. Why didn't they make a profit last year? Perhaps its expensive to host doubleheaders. I'd be interested to hear more details to back up your statements. I would greatly question how the Metroids could possibly lose 4-6 million last year. Player salaries are only $2 million. I wouldn't necessarily believe the b.s. the league spoonfeeds us. Do I believe the Metroids lost money last year? Yes, but the team probably took in 4-6 million in revenues (conservative estimates), so a loss of 4-6 million means they have a budget of 8-12 million. Right. Call me skeptical, but that's a lot of burgers & vodka for Sackowitz.
Peledre, when you say that a team is making a profit, do you mean the team is making a profit on its own, or do mean that it makes a profit even after it is burdened with its share of overall league losses? Last year, for instance, the Columbus Crew reportedly made a profit based on its own revenues and costs. However, the franchise lost money overall due to its share of the league's losses.
why do we need this thread? we all know that mls wont make any money this year maybe change the name to profitability in 2007
Peter Wilt said on the SoccerFanatics radio show tht the Fire would become profitable with their new lease agreement at Soldier Field. They are NOT near profitable at NCC however.
AEG owns the stadium. LAG will pay rent to AEG for the use of the stadium. I'm sure the LAG will get consessions and parking (or at least some of it) It'll be a deal similor to what the Kings do at Staples Center.
-$200k/match for giants stadium -pay for local tv games -pay for local radio games -pay for local tv/radio/newspaper advertising -pay for practice fields -pay for travel (airfar, hotels, food... preseason, mls, u.s. open cup) -metrostars red and black -medical expenses -salaries for team personell (coaches, gm, etc.) -rent for team's offices (if not covered in game rent, i'm assuming not) -whatever league losses metros have to cover jack for parking, i believe they get jack from concessions... so just tickets and merchandising fees (or what's sold through the team's website) i'm sure i left some stuff out, but that's an idea
Okay, 200K per match x 14 = 2,800,000 (wow! That's almost obcene!), plus 1.7 million for the players. I can't believe the costs for buying tv & radio time are that great because the team gets the ad revenes. Ok, there's all sorts of other stuff: Nick, front office staff, travel expenses, practice fields, yada, yada, yada. Put a figure on it: $2 million? $3 million? Again, I'm agreeing the team is losing money, but I think its about 1/10th the amount quoted in an earlier post.
the $4-6 million loss figure came from a business journal article about two months ago. there's a thread about it in the Business & Media section somewhere if you do a search (unless it was wiped out in a crash). i have no idea if it was accurate; just reporting what it said; the Fire were reported to have lost the 2nd most: $3-5 million or something like that. wasn't a good sign that 2 of the 3 biggest markets were pulling the league down in terms of finances. there's a new thread over on the Wizards' boards (too tired to go get it)...they've already suprassed last year's season tix and are approaching their all time record set in '96. they believe they are on the way to reaching their goal of 7,000 plus... ...but whose to say.
you think new york tv is going to be cheap? you think there is a ton of commercials during a soccer game? it's one of the biggest problems i have no idea on the radio, but i'm sure the tv is one of the biggest costs the metros deal with oh yeah, there is a metrostars cable show (once a week or so?)... i'd imagine that is paid for as well
cause the question got asked in here: Wizards Blow Past 2002 Season Ticket Total - Wizards Release cool also says there are 615 crusaders (goal of 1000)
Past Profitability Thread This may help. It's a little outdated in the fact that Dallas isn't in the Cotton Bowl anymore and may or may not need to reach attendance stated in order to reach profitability. Profitability is definatly attainable if the articles numbers are correct.
You would think the league will cut its losses even more this coming year. Dallas is suppossed to be profitable at dragon stadium, La will be in their own stadium, Columbus will be again, Colorado I think lost very little last year and I read somewhere where a rapids official thinks they will be profitable by 2004 so I assume this year they will be even better off, NE lost very little last year and should pick up at the gate this year after last year's performance, KC I think could be very close to profitability this year due to increase in ticket sales and a continued great lease, San Jose apperently only lost 500k last year and should be better off this year as it seems the fans are starting to come back. The three that will continue to kill the league will be DC, Chicago, and NY. Chicago will get killed again at Naperville but will be profitable once they get into Soldier field in 2004, DC has a continued bad lease and will continue to lose millions annually, NY again will be the biggest drain losing millions while getting raped at giants stadium. I think every year the future looks brighter.
I believe the Rapids came close, IIRC to within 500k, as did a couple other teams. But Colorado will see nowhere near the attendance figures that they did last year (if they did, I would consider it one of the bigger success stories quite a while). And because of the fact that MLS's outside stadium revenues (merchandise, tv deals, sponsorships, etc...) are quite small, most of MLS's revenue comes in the form of gameday ticket sales, parking revenue, etc... and can fluxuate a good deal from year to year based solely on attendances. Once we get to the point of guaranteed money and revenue sharing for all teams, profitability will weigh much less heavily on attendances, and more upon the health of the league, strength of TV deals, etc... A few other people have already addressed the Metro's issue, and there is simply no way in hell the metro's will ever make a profit at GS (See Jim's post). I will play a full 90 in a thong in front Naperville before the Metro's even come close to less than $1mil in losses for a year at GS in the next 3 years.
FWIW, Champion's World claims Stillitano had a budget of 9M. http://www.championsworld.com/about_managementteam.asp?DN=1
Well if they reach the point of profitability, i'm sure people would take more interest in acquiring a franchise or two, which would increase demand, therefore increasing value.
I think the point was that valuation of sports franchises can be tricky. Current profitability is nice, but any company can have some value if there's any chance, even in the distant future, that it will be even a little profitable. But it's probably even more true for sports franchises because some people are simply willing to sustain a loss in order to be franchise owners. The more established MLS is, the greater we'll be able to get people like that to buy...
Re: Re: Profitability in 2003 but since AEG owns the galaxy, its just shifting the money from one pocket to the other. That way even if the galaxy do make a profit, they can say they didn't make a profit because they had to pay rent, if you know what I mean. THAT WAY they don't have to give the money to the metros or other teams. Basically, lets say the Galaxy are playing in the stadium and all their revenues and everything get them 1,000,000 profit(out of my ass), if they say they payed 800,000 for rent, now they only have to fork over 200,000 for league costs. Its complicated as hell and it involves taxes and other legal sh#t I don't know about Same deal with Hunt and KC, and Krafts and NE. Its a tough situation because they are all trying to find loopholes in "the system" So if I was going by strictly, if SEM was gone, which owners would be making profits off of a single team.... Columbus - no doubt they would be making money LA - ditto Chicago - nope, not yet at least Colorado - nope KC - probably NE - probably Metros - HA! Dallas - HA! SJ - HA! DC - HA! So in short, the only way teams are going to make money is if the owner owns the stadium and thats why thats all that people talk about during expansion: owners with stadium.
Chicago should have a higher attendance, but only because those first couple of games will not be while they are expanding the stadium. New England will likely loose some in attendance. remember the thrill of Gillette is gone now that its a year old. they should not loose a ton they made it to the finals and sold out the big house, so maybe they created a little buzz Dallas. their new capacity is lower, their average should drop. they will no longer have the chance at a high atendance game to bring the Avg up. they will however be more concistant in their numbers. less chance for a complete dud,and it will look decent even with only 7,000 in the stands. Denver. well I hope they dont take a complete nose dive in attendance. they did a great job last season. I would just be happy if they hold their ground. or limit the number of really low attendance games. San Jose. they should bring up their numbers little more. time is a good thing in the bay area. they will eventually draw well, but babt steps here i tell ya baby steps KC almost guarenteed to go up. they could really suprise us with all the effort put into them. Metro. they dropped off pretty well from the year before and i think they will rebound back up to the 20k range again. the begining of last season was killed by weather and it just cant be that bad again. besides i am bringing like 12 people the opening game DCU I hope they can pull back up the the 20 k again, but really I have no reason to speculate any change. LA. these guys should do really well in their new building with a championship under their belts. they should lead the league, but who knows how many people even know where carson is Columbus is never one too fluctuate too much, and they have no real reason for that to change. hoping it is 18k+ so I really only see Denver, Dallas and New England droping in attendance. hell, NE may even suprise me. since dallas and LA are getting new homes they are both likely in better financial situations. the drop off in dallas my not actually hurt their botom line. the bottom line in LA should look great, or at least much better. New England is in their own house, so if they bleed, it sure wont be that much. Denver will likely hurt the league for more than last year, but overall the league should loose less money. now if somehow the NY deal happens and Chicago moves back to soldiar, that would be two massive improvements for the 2004 season. if those reported numbers are correct and both chicago and NY move, the league would looke pretty good with no team loosing more than 1 million.