Lurker Posted March 8, 2006 Posted March 8, 2006 I think you're arguing both sides. Plus, you say this deal is good for the little guy. But from a business standpoint, is it fair to the Dan Snyders to make them give their money to the Ralph Wilsons if they are not maximizing their revenues in the first place? At the cheapest ticket prices in the league. What if they made those prices competitive? 620296[/snapback] Well, Danny Boy might think he's a genius, but all he has to do is sell about the same number of tickets as RW in a market that has 2X the population and 4X the personal income. Not that tough, IMO. Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia, DC-MD-VA-WV (CSA) Population--7.9 million Personal Income--$327 billion Buffalo/Rochester/Syracuse/Jamestown MSAs Population--2.9 million Personal Income--$85.2 billion
gmac17 Posted March 8, 2006 Posted March 8, 2006 But from a business standpoint, is it fair to the Dan Snyders to make them give their money to the Ralph Wilsons if they are not maximizing their revenues in the first place? i have a feeling Bob Kraft works harder to make money from his $300 million investment than Ralph does for the $90 million the state put into the ralph 8 years ago...
JCBoston Posted March 8, 2006 Posted March 8, 2006 i have a feeling Bob Kraft works harder to make money from his $300 million investment than Ralph does for the $90 million the state put into the ralph 8 years ago... 620813[/snapback] Yeah. He works harder at paying off his debt, too. $350 million of it. There has to be a way to allow the leveraged owners to pay down their debt without pissing on the guys that, effectively, loaned them the money in the first place: the other owners.
BB2004 Posted March 8, 2006 Posted March 8, 2006 Talks in TexasI like the sounds of a new deal giving teams a extra 10 million on the cap. Thats great because the big money clubs (Dallas, Washington, Philly) are over the cap and need the extra cap room. Washington needs all the help it can get...... So you can call this a muscle deal. But with a new deal and a deal that helps the little guys of the league help make a push to start relocating teams? Costs of everything now days are growing 25% more a year. Take a look at Buffalo in 10 years. Where does this city stand as far as jobs, growth, and population. Face the facts here, the Mills of the 70's are never coming back, people are leaving the city and heading south. Do you think the NFL will start making a push to put teams in big market areas? In the long run it would kill the NFL but they dont care as long as the cash rolls in. Im sure im not alone when I say this but the day the Buffalo Bills move from Buffalo, I quit on football. I B word and moan with the best of them when they play or are managed poorly but I will never root for another NFL team outside of Buffalo. 620247[/snapback] I agree
JDG Posted March 8, 2006 Posted March 8, 2006 The Bills are a regional team now. They don't rely on Buffalo/suburbs for their sole fan base and business revenue stream. They are the regional team for WNY, CNY and Southern Ontario. As long as the Buffalo Bills put a decent product out there, they will be able to get 70,000+ per game. What the county and state need to start planning for , however, is a new stadium. As much as we may not think it's needed, "the Ralph" is falling closer to the bottom of the league in terms of stadium's around the league. 620409[/snapback] But if there is no salary cap, and other teams can spend $50mil to $100mil more that the Bills each year in retaining and attracting free agents, for how long will the Bills be able to put a decent product out on the field? JDG
stinky finger Posted March 8, 2006 Posted March 8, 2006 Talks in TexasIm sure im not alone when I say this but the day the Buffalo Bills move from Buffalo, I quit on football. 620247[/snapback] Nobody would be more upset than I, should our beloved Bills exit OP, but I wouldn't "quit" football. I have a FFL championship to defend!!
RuntheDamnBall Posted March 8, 2006 Posted March 8, 2006 I think you're arguing both sides. Plus, you say this deal is good for the little guy. But from a business standpoint, is it fair to the Dan Snyders to make them give their money to the Ralph Wilsons if they are not maximizing their revenues in the first place? At the cheapest ticket prices in the league. What if they made those prices competitive? 620296[/snapback] Competitive with the rest of the NFL? Or competitive with a ticket in economically strapped WNY? Sorry, I don't buy the trend that an NFL ticket has to cost $80. It's too bad you feel otherwise.
Bill from NYC Posted March 8, 2006 Posted March 8, 2006 Competitive with the rest of the NFL? Or competitive with a ticket in economically strapped WNY? Sorry, I don't buy the trend that an NFL ticket has to cost $80. It's too bad you feel otherwise. 620962[/snapback] I have wondered about this. If ticket prices rose $10.00 per seat, would this prevent a large number of fans from attending games at RWS? I know the economy is bad, but is it THAT bad?
Tortured Soul Posted March 8, 2006 Posted March 8, 2006 How do YOU or anyone know that Ralph isn't "maximizing [his] revenues?" Outside of selling naming rights, which would at best bring-in $1-2M a year, if even that, what revenues has he NOT been maximizing? If he raised tickets to "competitive" prices, the stadium wouldn't sell-out. Hell it doesn't sell out fully about 1-2 times per year as it is, and even when the Bills were in the SB every year, season tickets never sold out. Raising ticket prices isn't the answer. But I guess making side deals with beverage and apparel companies IS the way to go, even though it screws-over his fellow owners. 620779[/snapback] Raising ticket prices might cause the stadium not to sell out, but 60,000 tickets at $50 apiece is more money that 70,000 tickets at $40 apiece. That is the point I'm trying to make. Didn't the Colts just get a $6 mil a year naming rights deal? Well, Danny Boy might think he's a genius, but all he has to do is sell about the same number of tickets as RW in a market that has 2X the population and 4X the personal income. Not that tough, IMO. Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia, DC-MD-VA-WV (CSA) Population--7.9 million Personal Income--$327 billion Buffalo/Rochester/Syracuse/Jamestown MSAs Population--2.9 million Personal Income--$85.2 billion 620798[/snapback] Look at the revenue Carolina and Indy produce in a market not all that different from Buffalo. Personally, I love the fact that Ralph is loyal to his fans. But at the same time, I can't blame JJ and Snyder for holding it against him that he won't take his team somewhere more profitable. Competitive with the rest of the NFL? Or competitive with a ticket in economically strapped WNY? Sorry, I don't buy the trend that an NFL ticket has to cost $80. It's too bad you feel otherwise. 620962[/snapback] If you want to compete at the highest level, you have to pay the other prices. Otherwise, why shouldn't fans in Boston - who pay twice what we pay - get to see a better team than we do in Buffalo? It's a business until proven otherwise.
PSU_Mouse Posted March 8, 2006 Posted March 8, 2006 Well, Danny Boy might think he's a genius, but all he has to do is sell about the same number of tickets as RW in a market that has 2X the population and 4X the personal income. Not that tough, IMO. Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia, DC-MD-VA-WV (CSA) Population--7.9 million Personal Income--$327 billion Buffalo/Rochester/Syracuse/Jamestown MSAs Population--2.9 million Personal Income--$85.2 billion 620798[/snapback] I agree with your premise - heck I don't think its all that challenging for snyder either. HOWEVER, there are two glaring omissions in your numbers: 1. Nothing for Southern Ontario, including Hamilton and Toronto. That will increase the population and income base quite a bit. 2. Ignoring the fact that another NFL franchise, the Baltimore Ravens, exist in the same CSA.
JDG Posted March 8, 2006 Posted March 8, 2006 I agree with your premise - heck I don't think its all that challenging for snyder either. HOWEVER, there are two glaring omissions in your numbers: 1. Nothing for Southern Ontario, including Hamilton and Toronto. That will increase the population and income base quite a bit. 2. Ignoring the fact that another NFL franchise, the Baltimore Ravens, exist in the same CSA. 620997[/snapback] Toronto is 100 miles away. A similar radius for Washington would include some of the suburbs of Philadelphia! Anyhow, here's the numbers on TV housholds, which is a rough approximation: Washington: 2,252,550 Baltimore: 1,089,220 Buffalo-Rochester: 1,029,890 Even if you add in Southern Ontario, you only get to about 1.4million for Buffalo-Rochester-S. ON. Having lived in Syracuse, I can tell you that Syracuse is not really "Bills Country" - the Giants get as much coverage there as the Bills do. And at any rate, if you give Buffalo Syracuse you have to give Baltimore York, PA, and so on. The moral of the story is that even if you give Buffalo a huge geographical area, only then does it even compete with just the core area around Baltimore, in a much more tightly compact area. Moreover, the area still doesn't begin to match Washington. In terms of money, it of course isn't even close to matching Washington, and is probably behind Baltimore. JDG
JDG Posted March 8, 2006 Posted March 8, 2006 Look at the revenue Carolina and Indy produce in a market not all that different from Buffalo. 2004 Revenues: #12 -Carolina, $169million #24 - Buffalo, $152million #29 - Indianapolis, $145million The Buffalo-Rochester combined media market is only about as large as the Charlotte or Indianapolis media market by themselves. And of course Charlotte has a huge banking industry. JDG
Lurker Posted March 8, 2006 Posted March 8, 2006 Look at the revenue Carolina and Indy produce in a market not all that different from Buffalo. 620971[/snapback] 2004 Revenue by Team: 1. Washington__$245 million 2. Dallas__$205 million 12. Carolina__$169 million 24. Buffalo__$152 million 29. Indianapolis__$145 million Carolina's a low-revenue market compared to Washington. Guys like Snyder and Jones think they're geniuses, but market size matters when it comes to revenue. The revenue issue is a straw man anyway--franchise value is the key metric that makes owning an NFL team worthwhile, and it continues to skyrocket year after year because of the game's popularity. Mess with the competitive balance, and that popularity may start to wane.
Lurker Posted March 8, 2006 Posted March 8, 2006 I agree with your premise - heck I don't think its all that challenging for snyder either. HOWEVER, there are two glaring omissions in your numbers: 1. Nothing for Southern Ontario, including Hamilton and Toronto. That will increase the population and income base quite a bit. 2. Ignoring the fact that another NFL franchise, the Baltimore Ravens, exist in the same CSA. 620997[/snapback] Southern Ontario (up to Hamilton) adds perhaps another 1.2 million residents and $2 billion in PI. Still gonna be smaller than Washington, though. In the 90's about 10% of the seats at RWS were filled by Canadians. I suspect that number is lower today, however. The Baltimore metro has essentially been absorbed into the Washington CSA and the two teams are much like NYC with the Jets and Gints. Not much of a lift to sell 140,000 tickets in a market of 7+ million people.
JDG Posted March 8, 2006 Posted March 8, 2006 Guys like Snyder and Jones think they're geniuses, but market size matters when it comes to revenue. In fairness, it is on just market size. The New York City market dwarfs all other markets, and yet the Giants and Jets are not at the top of NFL Revenues. A major reason for that is the lack of a modern NFL Stadium for these franchises, but more aggressive marketing by Snyder and Jones probably plays a role as well. JDG
RuntheDamnBall Posted March 8, 2006 Posted March 8, 2006 Raising ticket prices might cause the stadium not to sell out, but 60,000 tickets at $50 apiece is more money that 70,000 tickets at $40 apiece. That is the point I'm trying to make. 620971[/snapback] Tickets are already $50 apiece. Didn't the Colts just get a $6 mil a year naming rights deal?Look at the revenue Carolina and Indy produce in a market not all that different from Buffalo. 620971[/snapback] Carolina produces in a booming southern market as the only team in the Carolinas. The Bills are one of three NY teams (well, kinda) and share the rust belt with the Steelers and Browns. Even so, at $195 mil vs $173, the Bills aren't that far away, with far lower prices, far smaller fanbase and drastically worse economy. I would argue to Bill in NYC that the Bills probably take up a larger proportional chunk than other teams do in their markets. That's because WNY bleeds red, white and blue for them. The Colts -- I cannot even believe you're citing them as an example. They have a small stadium, have talked about moving for ages, and produce $7 mill a year less than the "lowly" Bills! Their team value rank from Forbes is 24th, one spot above the Bills! And they have been a playoff team for this entire decade! Not buying it. Personally, I love the fact that Ralph is loyal to his fans. But at the same time, I can't blame JJ and Snyder for holding it against him that he won't take his team somewhere more profitable. If you want to compete at the highest level, you have to pay the other prices. Otherwise, why shouldn't fans in Boston - who pay twice what we pay - get to see a better team than we do in Buffalo? It's a business until proven otherwise. 620971[/snapback] Snyder and JJ should shut up and realize they are fortunate, DAMN fortunate to own in proud, premier NFL markets that built up histories that long precede their pathetic actions of late. And they should shut up and realize that their league is nothing if its franchises have no character and are simply cash machines. The NFL's status as product compromises the game enough. A line's got to be drawn somewhere.
Tortured Soul Posted March 8, 2006 Posted March 8, 2006 2004 Revenues: #12 -Carolina, $169million #24 - Buffalo, $152million #29 - Indianapolis, $145million The Buffalo-Rochester combined media market is only about as large as the Charlotte or Indianapolis media market by themselves. And of course Charlotte has a huge banking industry. JDG 621053[/snapback] Indy just leveraged the city for a new stadium. Watch that revenue shoot up. Tickets are already $50 apiece. Even so, at $195 mil vs $173, the Bills aren't that far away, with far lower prices, far smaller fanbase and drastically worse economy. I would argue to Bill in NYC that the Bills probably take up a larger proportional chunk than other teams do in their markets. That's because WNY bleeds red, white and blue for them. Snyder and JJ should shut up and realize they are fortunate, DAMN fortunate to own in proud, premier NFL markets that built up histories that long precede their pathetic actions of late. And they should shut up and realize that their league is nothing if its franchises have no character and are simply cash machines. The NFL's status as product compromises the game enough. A line's got to be drawn somewhere. 621232[/snapback] The ticket price example was hypothetical. I don't know the real numbers. Look at how team revenues match up to market size and you'll see they're not all that correlated. Smart owners make more money. They aren't fortunate - they were smart to make their money (at least Snyder was. I don't know where JJ's money is from), and they want to make more. Ralph isn't starving - he's making money. I don't have a problem with Snyder objecting to handing him even more.
MikeSpeed Posted March 8, 2006 Posted March 8, 2006 In order to keep the competitiveness of the NFL, revenue sharing is a must. That is a given. But if I'm a Daniel Snyder, why would continue selling my stadium's name or any other "local" merchandise, if I'm going to end up giving it to the NFL. Especially when some teams don't sell their stadiums names at all. Like the Bills. Maybe the NFL need to either force all teams to sell their stadium's name, or tax the ones that don't an amount worthy of value of their stadium’s name. Or cap the amount of extra revenue a team can bring in on its own. I can see the NFL not wanting to limit any income so capping revenue seems unlikely. The only other option I can see is the NFL taking control of all merchandising for all the teams, and then splitting it up.
The Dean Posted March 8, 2006 Posted March 8, 2006 In order to keep the competitiveness of the NFL, revenue sharing is a must.That is a given. But if I'm a Daniel Snyder, why would continue selling my stadium's name or any other "local" merchandise, if I'm going to end up giving it to the NFL. Especially when some teams don't sell their stadiums names at all. Like the Bills. Maybe the NFL need to either force all teams to sell their stadium's name, or tax the ones that don't an amount worthy of value of their stadium’s name. Or cap the amount of extra revenue a team can bring in on its own. I can see the NFL not wanting to limit any income so capping revenue seems unlikely. The only other option I can see is the NFL taking control of all merchandising for all the teams, and then splitting it up. 621265[/snapback] I think that is a very reasonable compromise. I'm no fan of Snyder and his cronies...but, it is reasonable to expect naming rights to be sold in this day and age. Buffalo was at the forefront of this movement with Rich Stadium. So, if they want to figure that Ralph should be throwing an extra $1 mil/year or so into the pot...fine. On the other hand, PSL's are not reasonable...ever...period.
Recommended Posts