ChicagoRic Posted December 13, 2006 Posted December 13, 2006 Here's the deal---unless revenue sharing is worked out in such a way as to work for all of the existing NFL franchises, we're going to end up with the BMFL (big market football league) rather than the NFL. If that happens, the NFL will lose its national stature. Even Green Bay, which the NFL big marketeers have used to showcase a "successful" small market team, cannot hope to survive as things currently stand. Publicly owned or not, there are limits to capitalization. When Favre retires (sometime in the next 30 years or so) there is nobody to replace him. Small market teams will be left out in the cold, and instead of expansion teams, we'll start seeing contraction teams. The LA's and NYC's and Dallas and Atlanta will reap the financial benefits while the Buffalos and Baltimores and Clevelands and Minnesotas and even the Indy's (yes, the Colts, they are small market despite the current successful run) will end up drained both in terms of talent and finances. Sure, with only 20 or so teams the talent level will be amazing, but will football still be a national sport? Will it be relevant? Doubtful. Will if be profitable? Yup. From my $$$? No way in heck. Revenue sharing can and should be fixed for the benefit of the NFL as a whole. Some have posted here that $7million in profit is a lot of money, and that may be true, but it pales somewhat when you're talking about one team in a multi-billion (yes, billion is One Thousand Million) dollar business enterprise. Yes Ralph Wilson is a multimillionaire, but to ask a 7 million dollar profit team to contribute to a 300 million dollar project of the benefit of another team with no guarantee of its own survival is just crazy. Bottom line---Ralph Wislon should be allowed to whine all he wants, and what's more, he is right. The big market teams hold the cards and can dictate what will happen, but in the end they may end up killing the goose that laid the godlen egg. Discuss?
eSJayDee Posted December 13, 2006 Posted December 13, 2006 Another way of looking at it - We have a "relatively" worthless franchise; it's maybe worth "only" $300-$400mil. If you had that sort of money, what sort of ROI is $7m? About 2% - far worse than you can get in the bank. Businesses like that can't prosper in the long run.
Bill from NYC Posted December 13, 2006 Posted December 13, 2006 Another way of looking at it -We have a "relatively" worthless franchise; it's maybe worth "only" $300-$400mil. If you had that sort of money, what sort of ROI is $7m? About 2% - far worse than you can get in the bank. Businesses like that can't prosper in the long run. 865147[/snapback] Yes, but how many investments go from $25,000 to at least $600,000,000? This, with some public funds. The thing is, these "new" owners have a lot more money than Ralph. The Seahawks, Cowboys, Falcons, Jests, and Broncos are examples of teams with owners that are SOOO rich that they simply don't need to turn a profit from their football team. 7 million dollars to Paul Allen is probably something far less than an afterthought. It is hard for me to guess what frame of mind Ralph is in, and this is NOT an age remark. I don't know what to make of the Ford Taurus, nor the low budget coaches. He DID shell out big bucks for TKO not too long ago, but I can't tell if he is really ready to put any major amount of cash into the franchise (in terms of a new stadium, 20 million dollar signing bonuses, etc.). I honestly do have some doubt. What I do know is that contracts are about to skyrocket. This has already started, whereas Hutchinson is a 50 million dollar Guard. It will get worse, and this means Nate Clements and other UFAs are going to demand (and receive) HUGE contracts. Watch what Kelsay gets, whereas he is a DE who can rush the QB. He might receive a bigger contract than Schobel signed for. He doesn't deserve more than AS mind you but again, times have changed. I hope that much of what he says is posturing, and a play for a better piece of the action. Who really knows?
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 13, 2006 Posted December 13, 2006 Ralph is old school plain and simple... he wants to see the fans at the game sitting on benches enjoying themselves like they used to do... He is working class. Buffalo is one of the few tickets a working person can get. Do you really want to see a season ticket waiting list?... Face it, the NFL is becoming an elitist sport...
stuckincincy Posted December 13, 2006 Posted December 13, 2006 Ralph is old school plain and simple... he wants to see the fans at the game sitting on benches enjoying themselves like they used to do... He is working class. Buffalo is one of the few tickets a working person can get. Do you really want to see a season ticket waiting list?... Face it, the NFL is becoming an elitist sport... 865704[/snapback] EII hits it square on the nail! Couldn't agree more...
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 13, 2006 Posted December 13, 2006 EII hits it square on the nail! Couldn't agree more... 865816[/snapback] I am I am I may not be as wise as you (notice I said wise, not old... )... Do you think they will go as far as letting fans bring "beerballs" into the stands again? Nothing like sitting in the stands with your very own "tapper" going! Ahhh... The good ole days... How I pine for thee! But really... Ralph is a classic, which you gotta love! He isn't selling out to the "Bordeaux Crowd." And you know what? He is paying dearly in the media for not towing the "new line" in the NFL... Gotta admire his ideals...
Bill from NYC Posted December 13, 2006 Posted December 13, 2006 Ralph is old school plain and simple... he wants to see the fans at the game sitting on benches enjoying themselves like they used to do... He is working class. Buffalo is one of the few tickets a working person can get. Do you really want to see a season ticket waiting list?... Face it, the NFL is becoming an elitist sport... 865704[/snapback] That was such a great post! Very short, but it raises a multitude of issues imo... 1) I highly doubt that Ralph is "working class," but he IS old school. His comment when Big Mike told him he was depressed ("that makes two of us") went a long way to describe RW, or so I see it. That was great. 2) As for a waiting list, it wouldn't effect me so much. It costs me a ton of money now to go see a Bills game. I would feel sorry for people who are shut out, but it just might take this for the Bills to survive at some point. This is because..... 3) You are correct, the NFL IS becoming an "elitist game." I like it better at RWS, where I can hang out at 1/5 with the TSW crowd. I am so happy at 1/5 at the tailgates that I probably scare some of the people around me. That said, times change. As much as I like it now, more might be required to keep this team in WNY. I admit to being a bit concerned about the 6,800 empty seats, despite what you have correctly stated about stadium size, etc. People on this board claiming to be economists say I am wrong, but I truly think that losing the Bills would make a bad economic situation in WNY plenty worse. It would also be depressing for the thousands of loyal fans. I don't know if I myself could ever again support any other team in any sport. In summary, if a new stadium and/or a new owner is required to keep this football team where it is, I am all for it. Once again E I I, times change.
obie_wan Posted December 14, 2006 Posted December 14, 2006 Another way of looking at it -We have a "relatively" worthless franchise; it's maybe worth "only" $300-$400mil. If you had that sort of money, what sort of ROI is $7m? About 2% - far worse than you can get in the bank. Businesses like that can't prosper in the long run. 865147[/snapback] The problem is compounded when a buyer takes over the Bills with debt service on $300 million. The $7 mil profit quickly turns into a $17 mil loss without factoring into the cash drain of big signing bonuses. With a weak economy and no major corporate headquasters in town, there is no base to buy luxury boxes even if the NFl kicked in to build a state of the aret stadium. Can't see how the Bills will be able to remianin Buffalo after Ralph is out of the picture unless major changes are made to the revenue sharing arrangement.
DPR4444 Posted December 14, 2006 Posted December 14, 2006 i saw this on SI.com: "It is only a matter of time before the ever-growing corporate giant NFL puts pressure on the Bills to build a splendiferous new stadium for the team to remain financially competitive and maximize the revenue split among the 32 teams. -- Rochester Democrat and Chronicle"
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 15, 2006 Posted December 15, 2006 The problem is compounded when a buyer takes over the Bills with debt service on $300 million. The $7 mil profit quickly turns into a $17 mil loss without factoring into the cash drain of big signing bonuses. With a weak economy and no major corporate headquasters in town, there is no base to buy luxury boxes even if the NFl kicked in to build a state of the aret stadium. Can't see how the Bills will be able to remianin Buffalo after Ralph is out of the picture unless major changes are made to the revenue sharing arrangement. 866370[/snapback] I still think that Fisher-Price is missing the boat! What a better name for a stadium than: Little People Field
keepthefaith Posted December 15, 2006 Posted December 15, 2006 Yes, but how many investments go from $25,000 to at least $600,000,000? This, with some public funds. The thing is, these "new" owners have a lot more money than Ralph. The Seahawks, Cowboys, Falcons, Jests, and Broncos are examples of teams with owners that are SOOO rich that they simply don't need to turn a profit from their football team. 7 million dollars to Paul Allen is probably something far less than an afterthought. It is hard for me to guess what frame of mind Ralph is in, and this is NOT an age remark. I don't know what to make of the Ford Taurus, nor the low budget coaches. He DID shell out big bucks for TKO not too long ago, but I can't tell if he is really ready to put any major amount of cash into the franchise (in terms of a new stadium, 20 million dollar signing bonuses, etc.). I honestly do have some doubt. What I do know is that contracts are about to skyrocket. This has already started, whereas Hutchinson is a 50 million dollar Guard. It will get worse, and this means Nate Clements and other UFAs are going to demand (and receive) HUGE contracts. Watch what Kelsay gets, whereas he is a DE who can rush the QB. He might receive a bigger contract than Schobel signed for. He doesn't deserve more than AS mind you but again, times have changed. I hope that much of what he says is posturing, and a play for a better piece of the action. Who really knows? 865167[/snapback] I think Ralph in genuinely concerned about small market teams remaining profitable and competitive and the Bills staying in Buffalo beyond his life. An NFL franchise might be worth $600 million in a larger market, but if the team operates at $7 million profit per year in Buffalo, I doubt you'll find an investor that will spend $600 million to make a $7 million annual return. That's barely over 1%. Unless of course it is strictly for the "love of the game". In Buffalo, the franchise might be worth less than half of that. Maybe a lot less. In a larger market it's potentially worth a lot more. Yes, Ralph has a lot of equity in the team on paper. With the new agreement, he might be forced to spend some of that equity to hire top notch management and sign better free agents and draft choices. Doing that will again diminish the value of the team in Buffalo if it is cash flow negative. This is very complicated for Ralph right now. Without a level playing field revenue-wise and with the team likely nearing an ownership change, he or his estate may be forced to choose between doing what's best for Buffalo or what's best for him or his estate. Under the old bargaining agreement where players got a smaller piece of the revenue pie and some of the revenue (luxury suites, etc) was not paid to players, the Bills were in a better financial position. A better position in which to compete financially while playing in Buffalo. The new agreement has come at a very bad time for the Bills. This is one time when you wish he had a son or daughter that wanted to take over the reigns and maintain the team. I'm not familiar with estate laws so I don't know the impact his death would have on his estate. My guess is they would be forced to sell the team to pay taxes. Maybe however there is a way to set up the team in a trust and continue to have the trust own the team after his death with new management. Maybe there is a way to eliminate or delay the tax impact. I'm sure Ralph has explored all of the possible scenarios. Maybe the Bills in an ownership change could benefit from Packer-like ownership. Public or partial public ownership. Maybe as many as a million Bills Fans would be willing to buy a few shares of stock along with a new ownership group. That doesn't solve the revenue share problem, but it might help to raise a more competitive offer for the team. That and some support from the state could help bridge the gap. Personally I'd like to see Ralph sell the team soon while he can still pick the buyer, and maybe that was his plan. The new agreement threw a wrench into that as it weakens the value of the team in Buffalo and weakens the investment opportunity. For now, I'm glad to see that Ralph appears healthy.
Kelly the Dog Posted December 15, 2006 Posted December 15, 2006 Unless you guys are talking about something completely different, the "$7 million" number that Ralph spoke about in his diatribe was not the profit he makes on the team, it was the amount he takes in and keeps just from luxury boxes, compared to the multi-millions other teams make from the boxes. He makes millions and millions more on the team. http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20061...?tbd1055598.asp
keepthefaith Posted December 15, 2006 Posted December 15, 2006 Unless you guys are talking about something completely different, the "$7 million" number that Ralph spoke about in his diatribe was not the profit he makes on the team, it was the amount he takes in and keeps just from luxury boxes, compared to the multi-millions other teams make from the boxes. He makes millions and millions more on the team. http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20061...?tbd1055598.asp 867205[/snapback] The Forbes survey shows buffalo 25th in the league at $176 million in revenue and $31 million in profit. More encouraging numbers, but there still exists a huge disparity among the team revenues with many above $200 million and these numbers are from before the new CBA. http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/30/06nfl_...ns_Revenue.html
eSJayDee Posted December 15, 2006 Posted December 15, 2006 The Forbes survey shows buffalo 25th in the league at $176 million in revenue and $31 million in profit. Didn't the cap go up like $20+ mill this last yr from 70 something to $101m? If this is the case, and he made $31m LAST yr, expected profit for THIS yr (& subsequent yrs unless something is done) may well be only around $7m.
Kelly the Dog Posted December 15, 2006 Posted December 15, 2006 Didn't the cap go up like $20+ mill this last yr from 70 something to $101m?If this is the case, and he made $31m LAST yr, expected profit for THIS yr (& subsequent yrs unless something is done) may well be only around $7m. 867416[/snapback] The amount the TV contracts went up this year to each team was 36% over last year. It's millions MORE than the salary cap for each team. His profits this year will be much, much more than last year.
Recommended Posts