Maple Leaf Sports Profit Margin

[Higgly]

This has got to be both a moral and a religious issue... :angry:

The Saturday October 27 edition Toronto Star (FRONT PAGE) informs us that one of the biggest losers in the NHL, the Toronto Maple Laffs, AKA Toronto Maple Losers, is generating an astonishing profit margin of 22%. How do they do it? Oh they have ways...

After Matts Sundin scored his 500th goal, Leafs Management took the netting from the goal, cut it into a thousand little pieces and sold it off plastred to a crad with picture of Sundin for a total of $C 40,000.

Just one of the many ways Maple Leaf Sports has found to extract money from the public without having won a Stanley Cup in over 40 years!

Sort of reminds me of the troop surge

That's right, folks. An ordinary guy can't afford to take his family to the game any more, what with tickets up in the stratosphere, but corporate seasons ticket holders wil keep paying just to have somewhere to take their customers for the big show.

Anybody who thinks that capitalism awlways produces the best results, need only look at this farce. Just incredible.

Edited November 1, 2007 by Higgly

[Moxie]

What hockey players are paid is obsene, it's passed on to the fans in the ticket price. Figure skating is much more affordable on the pocket book Higgly.

[Amazing Atheist]

What hockey players are paid is obsene, it's passed on to the fans in the ticket price. Figure skating is much more affordable on the pocket book Higgly.

Yeah but figure skating sucks though.... It would be awesome if they allowed female only pairs skating then I may be more inclined to watch.

Ticket prices aren't the only source of income for franchises. Most of the actual revenue generated comes from merchandising and royalties. Basketball, Baseball and NFL players all make more then NHL players do although they still make more then CFL players even still.

But I agree that ticket prices are high way to high though. To me it seems that it is really about price gouging then making money to pay players. there is no reason why prices should be as high as what they are.

This being said I'm not a leafs fan anyway and the only reason why I would want them to win is to keep the cup Canadian.

[guyser]

The whole company is a pain in the ass from Tanenbaum down to Peddie. And Peddie is the absolute worst guy to helm the organization. He knows bupkis about hockey and is one of the guys that picks the coaches and the GM. He really needs to be fired and soon. Recall he is the one who hired the previous GM for the Raptors and that guy was horrible.

IIRC Tannenbaum , who likes b-ball but doesnt know much about it,was the guy to fire that pitiful GM and canvass the league for a proper GM. Colangelo knew the situation in TO and said hire me only if you give me carte blanche. They did and look at them now. Last years division champs, rated 4th in the conf this year. Sell outs all the time now.

Tannenbaum , who does know hockey, at least he thinks he does , along w Peddie hires JFJ , who has pretty much sucked. But JFJ does not have carte blanche. MOst of his moves have to be approved.

The Teachers pension , damn I wish they would just sell out and have some individual buy the team , hell even Ted Rogers would be better.

I dont think prices are that far out . Yes expensive for the average guy, but a wanted commodity will always return what the market holds. And in this market , that is $300 a platinum seat.....not to mention your seat licence which I think is $90,000. (that seems high tho)

Hockey players are not paid obscene amounts. That to me is pure folly. They are paid what the market can bear as a result of revenue generated. The option is to pay the players less and give the owners a big fat larger portion. I have never attended a Leafs game to see the owner, and even when I sat beside Harold Ballard I never cared.(Golds about 4 seats away from the bunker)

But I must admit, even though I think prices are high but not ridiculous, I have never paid to t see a game at MLG nor Acc , Raptors, Leafs , Toros ...

And if you want one of the best experiences ever, sit courtside for a Raptor game. The tickets cannot be bought and actually say right on them where the price goes....PRICELESS. True and funny.

[capricorn]

The Saturday October 27 edition Toronto Star (FRONT PAGE) informs us that one of the biggest losers in the NHL, the Toronto Maple Laffs, AKA Toronto Maple Losers, is generating an astonishing profit margin of 22%. How do they do it?

They do it by protecting their turf and making sure Hamilton doesn't get an NHL franchise.

[guyser]

They do it by protecting their turf and making sure Hamilton doesn't get an NHL franchise.

Thats in the league by laws and Bettman protects that.

Now if you want to make a case for Waterloo , then that was the Leafs that killed Ballsilie's bid.

[Black Dog]

Ticket prices aren't the only source of income for franchises. Most of the actual revenue generated comes from merchandising and royalties. Basketball, Baseball and NFL players all make more then NHL players do although they still make more then CFL players even still.

Not in the NHL. More than 90 per cent of league revenue is generated by ticket sales and local TV. Only about 3 per cent of NHL revenue comes from its lame-o national TV contract, which means other revenue (including merchandising and licensing) is around 7 per cent, tops.

But I agree that ticket prices are high way to high though. To me it seems that it is really about price gouging then making money to pay players. there is no reason why prices should be as high as what they are.

There absolutely is a reason ticket prices are as high as they are: people are willing to pay them.

[guyser]

Not in the NHL. More than 90 per cent of league revenue is generated by ticket sales and local TV. Only about 3 per cent of NHL revenue comes from its lame-o national TV contract, which means other revenue (including merchandising and licensing) is around 7 per cent, tops.

There absolutely is a reason ticket prices are as high as they are: people are willing to pay them.

But in the NHL there are loose interpretation of rules. That was one of the problems during the strike.

For instance parking,is that NHL generated revenue or not? Some teams do not consider that rev. Conecessions outside the rink but on the property , is that an NHL rev generated?

If the gate were the only thing to pay the players, how come Columbus or Chicago can survive? (prior to this year since both are up in the standings)

Edited November 2, 2007 by guyser

[Black Dog]

But in the NHL there are loose interpretation of rules. That was one of the problems during the strike.

For instance parking,is that NHL generated revenue or not? Some teams do not consider that rev. Conecessions outside the rink but on the property , is that an NHL rev generated?

The new (can I still call it that?) CBA has a pretty detailed itemization of what constitutes "hockey related revenue". No doubt there's some fudging, but I can't imagine it's enough to swing the balance of revenue generation away from the gate. It's just too big a percentage.

If the gate were the only thing to pay the players, how come Columbus or Chicago can survive? (prior to this year since both are up in the standings)

Post CBA revenue sharing means teams that do well at the gate end up funding the payrolls of teams that struggle with attendance. Some revenue sharing money comes from an escrow account which the players themselves pay into. There's other reasons I'm sure, but that's the first that comes to mind.

[Higgly]

This is a sports team. Sports is about competition and may the best team win.

This is a team that hasn't won since Kennedy was assassinated.

Clearly Maple Leaf Sports has decided that this doesn't matter and that the most important thing is the profit. This reached a nadir when they tried to make a buck this year off of the 40th anniversary since the Leafs won the Stanley Cup. Can it get any more pathetic?

The NHL is no longer a sports league. It is now a corporation. Going to see the Leafs play is now like going down to Bay Street and watching a banker park his Porsche.

[guyser]

This is a team that hasn't won since Kennedy was assassinated.

They have won three Stanley cups since that date.

but none in long time......

[Higgly]

Well OK, since Expo '67. But you get my point.

[fellowtraveller]

I hope nothing changes. It is a rite of spring to watch the Leafs fail, and one I enjoy thoruoghly as do millions of fellow Canadians.

Why?

Because as a kid in the ROC I had to endure watching that boring dump it in crap every Saturday night.

Yep, that's every Saturday night.

The only reason anybody watched at all was to get some sense of what the other teams looked like. The best thing ever was when our city got the French CBC channel and you could watch some decent hockey, albeit in French.

It's a wonder it didn't turn me off the game entirely.

[Higgly]

Because as a kid in the ROC ...

Rest of Canada? I know what you mean though.

[Black Dog]

Clearly Maple Leaf Sports has decided that this doesn't matter and that the most important thing is the profit. This reached a nadir when they tried to make a buck this year off of the 40th anniversary since the Leafs won the Stanley Cup. Can it get any more pathetic?

I think that's overly harsh. The Leafs, despite their record of Stanley Cup futility, simply haven't been that terrible. They've made the post season six times in the last 10 years (they've missed the playoffs every year since the lockout, though came close last year) and made the conference finals three times in those six years. That's really not bad record, especially when compared to most of the other Original Six teams like Montreal or Boston (five playoff berths in 10 years), the Rangers (two post season berths since 1997) or Chicago (one first round exit in the last decade). Detroit is obviously in a class by itself.

Given how competitive the league is and the simple fact that only one team can win the big mug each year, I wouldn't complain too much if I was a Leafs fan which, thank god, I'm not.

Edited November 2, 2007 by Black Dog

[Higgly]

Given how competitive the league is and the simple fact that only one team can win the big mug each year, I wouldn't complain too much if I was a Leafs fan which, thank god, I'm not.

There are now 30 teams. For much of that 40 years there were less. I'd say the odds dictate at least one win in 40 years.

The Leafs are just not trying.

[guyser]

Well OK, since Expo '67. But you get my point.

Get get? Get it?

I F****** live with it and die with them every year.....and have family in Ottawa. Oh yeah I get it !

..insert smiley

[guyser]

I hope nothing changes. It is a rite of spring to watch the Leafs fail,

...you mean after beating Ottawa out right?

[M.Dancer]

No one has ever gone broke betting against the Maple Laughs........

[Higgly]

So finally we all agree on something! What are we going to do about it?

[guyser]

So finally we all agree on something! What are we going to do about it?

One thing right off the bat. Fire Peddie. Fire JFJ...wait that is two...okay make it three, get rid of the teachers pension fund....

And then, rebuild through the draft. Just look at Ottawa and Detroit'

[Higgly]

Personally I believe that what we need to do is dis-enfranchise a few teams and then extend the franchise over to Europe. Think about it. Moscow, Prague, Stockholm.... These are great hockey towns. I'd love to see a year in which the bottom 4 teams lose their franchise to Europe. You wanna see competition? Man, it would be just too sweet. Or should I say 'tout suite'

Edited November 2, 2007 by Higgly

[Black Dog]

There are now 30 teams. For much of that 40 years there were less. I'd say the odds dictate at least one win in 40 years.

The Leafs are just not trying.

You'll note again the size of the sample I posted. And yeah, all things being equal, a team should win the Cup at least once every 30 years. But all things are not equal. I think the fact that the Leafs can be counted on to challenge for a playoff spot most years should be of some consolation.

The Leafs are just not trying.

Don't confuse inability to execute with a lack of effort.

Personally I believe that what we need to do is dis-enfranchise a few teams and then extend the franchise over to Europe. Think about it. Moscow, Prague, Stockholm.... These are great hockey towns. I'd love to see a year in which the bottom 4 teams lose their franchise to Europe. You wanna see competition? Man, it would be just too sweet. Or should I say 'tout suite

Jesus: can you imagine the travel for road games?

Edited November 2, 2007 by Black Dog

[Higgly]

Jesus: can you imagine the travel for road games?

Do it this way. First year, we see games between Euro teams once a week. Maybe a cross-Atlantic series a couple of times during the season to build up excitement. Divide the Euros into an Eastern and Western league. Each Euro team gets maybe one tour of its respective division in North America, A Euro play-off gets you a spot in the quarter finals.

If Bettman wants to build an audience he's gotta do something, and I think something like this would work.

I couldn't believe that the NHL ignored Europe during the expansion process. What were they thinking? It's a natural!

[Black Dog]

Do it this way. First year, we see games between Euro teams once a week. Maybe a cross-Atlantic series a couple of times during the season to build up excitement. Divide the Euros into an Eastern and Western league. Each Euro team gets maybe one tour of its respective division in North America, A Euro play-off gets you a spot in the quarter finals.

It'd never fly. Only way that works is if the Euro league and NHL act as separate leagues, with the champions meeting for a best of 7 series (thus ensuring no team ever repeats as champs twice in a row.)