PFW:Increase in season-ticket sales only Band-Aid for Bills' finan

[Lori]

remember, the cap is based on TOTAL revenue, even though the owners don't have to share any of the ridiculous $$$ they'll be charging for premium seats and suites. And the Bills were already having problems selling the suites at the Ralph, for prices far lower than what the market will bear in larger cities.

My understanding of that TOTAL revenue under the new CBA means TOTAL and that the income derived from selling suites and premium seats is no longer a dodge that team owners can use to escape their inclusion under the salary cap.

 

The old CBA gave players a right to a sliding scale which maxed out above 70% of the "designated" gross which did not include the suites and premium seats.

 

The players agreed to a lower % in the new cap (60.5%) because the dodge of putting in more suites and premium seats was taken away and the new total revenue actually gives the player a smaller % of a much higher number.

We're talking about two different things. The players DO get their cut based on "total revenue," which includes naming rights, PSLs, and such. However, the suite/club sales do NOT count as part of the gate receipts (other than the cost of the tickets themselves), so visiting teams won't see a financial windfall from road games in the new Dallas and Giants/Jets stadiums.

 

"Total football revenue": good for players, not so much for the small-market franchises.

[Lurker]

Marv and Dick Jauron are both close personal friends with Hub Arkush.

 

It's no coincidence that Pro Football Weekly has "leaked" or supplied more reliable information regarding the Bills since Levy and Jauron have been associated with the team the last few years. Just as Donahoe spilled info. continually to Mort and Len Pasquarelli, news has been steered to PFW under Levy and Jauron.

 

Do you get Pro Football Weekly to notice this?

 

Have you been to Pro Football Weekly's corporate office outside of Chicago and talked with Hub Arkush?(and specifically talked to him about Jauron and Levy?)

 

Have you watched a Bills game with Marv's wife and daughter?(who like Marv, live in Chicago)

 

Have you been to many events around Chicago and met Marv?(He is very active and connected in the Chicago community)

 

I can answer yes to the the above questions. What about you?

 

Marv's life doesn't revolve around his relationship with Ralph Wilson.(or for that matter The Buffalo Bills) Sorry, if this is hard for you.

 

As much as Marv is loyal to ALL , he is not beneath sharing with people outside of the Buffalo microscope his TRUE opinion on the Buffalo franchise matter, especially if he's sharing it with someone he trusts like Arkush and his staff.

You keep missing my point. Yes, I'll agree with you that Marv and Dick are friends of Arkush and would talk between-the-sidelines football with him and the PFW stringers til the cows come home.

 

What I do disagree with is that Marv would be inclined to say the things attributed to that 'source.' Essentially, something like"yeah, that old codger Ralph has stated the Bills have no intention of moving to Toronto, but don't believe anything he says...it's inevitable the team is moving, no matter how many tickets they sell at RWS."

 

IMO, Marv is too much a gentleman to ever go that route. I've met Marv, I like Marv and I don't understand why you'd think he's say the kind of stuff included in that PFW blurb (knowing it would be printed), since you apparently like him very much as well....

[Arkady Renko]

My understanding of that TOTAL revenue under the new CBA means TOTAL and that the income derived from selling suites and premium seats is no longer a dodge that team owners can use to escape their inclusion under the salary cap.

 

The old CBA gave players a right to a sliding scale which maxed out above 70% of the "designated" gross which did not include the suites and premium seats.

 

The players agreed to a lower % in the new cap (60.5%) because the dodge of putting in more suites and premium seats was taken away and the new total revenue actually gives the player a smaller % of a much higher number.

We're talking about two different things. The players DO get their cut based on "total revenue," which includes naming rights, PSLs, and such. However, the suite/club sales do NOT count as part of the gate receipts (other than the cost of the tickets themselves), so visiting teams won't see a financial windfall from road games in the new Dallas and Giants/Jets stadiums.

 

"Total football revenue": good for players, not so much for the small-market franchises.

 

This loophole in the revenue sharing system does not make sense to me. What makes regular tickets any more worthy of being shared as luxury boxes? Change the split from the 60/40 or whatever it is now on everything, but get rid of the stupid formula for revenue sharing for smaller teams and share all revenues at some level with the visiting team including the luxury boxes.

[Pyrite Gal]

My understanding of that TOTAL revenue under the new CBA means TOTAL and that the income derived from selling suites and premium seats is no longer a dodge that team owners can use to escape their inclusion under the salary cap.

 

The old CBA gave players a right to a sliding scale which maxed out above 70% of the "designated" gross which did not include the suites and premium seats.

 

The players agreed to a lower % in the new cap (60.5%) because the dodge of putting in more suites and premium seats was taken away and the new total revenue actually gives the player a smaller % of a much higher number.

We're talking about two different things. The players DO get their cut based on "total revenue," which includes naming rights, PSLs, and such. However, the suite/club sales do NOT count as part of the gate receipts (other than the cost of the tickets themselves), so visiting teams won't see a financial windfall from road games in the new Dallas and Giants/Jets stadiums.

 

"Total football revenue": good for players, not so much for the small-market franchises.

Yes, but my sense is that the difference this makes is one of whether a franchise makes money hand over fist, over feet or simply makes money hand over fist.

 

It will not make such a large difference in terms of competitiveness as the basis for this is that all teams operate under the same salary cap.

 

It is significant whether the profits are huge or exhorbitantly huge, but changes the marginal decision to one not of survival but to one of how much is too much.

 

Since Ralph put up mere chump change as his original investment, the decision is somewhat easier for him to make. As he is an old man without immediate financial needs (or desires), the decision is even easier. As his heirs have no desire to run the team the decision is even easier than that.

 

For these and other reasons, the best answer to me would seem to be for him to use the vestige of individual control left to him to set up his will to force the NFL into the opportunity to send Buffalo's ownership future along a Green Bay Packers type model.

 

It can be constructed in such a manner as to protect his heirs financially (if they wanted to run the team it would be harder but still doable actually). If Ralph wanted to make it so and NYS and Buffalo wanted to make it so (using the antitrust exemption as their leverage on the NFL, the NFL would likely have to buy it also as it actually fits their strategy of moving into new foreign markets as maintaining an original AFL team in a small market would make the story (which is what is ultimately being sold) a more evocative one to tell.

 

The reality here is that yes WNY is a far smaller market than NYC or Toronto. However, one should not allow this fact to get us to define our small market as anything but the reality that it is huge in terms of the amount of return for investment it will produce. This is easily true for the small initial Ralph investment and even true for the investment required to buy the team from Ralph.

 

Baghdad is a small market. NYC is a huge market. WNY is in between the two but has a bit more in common with NYC than it does with Baghdad.

[Lori]

This loophole in the revenue sharing system does not make sense to me. What makes regular tickets any more worthy of being shared as luxury boxes? Change the split from the 60/40 or whatever it is now on everything, but get rid of the stupid formula for revenue sharing for smaller teams and share all revenues at some level with the visiting team including the luxury boxes.

I agree with you, but I don't see any way the Jerry Joneses and Dan Snyders of the world allow it to happen. They'd just say, "Hey, we make money because we know how to market our teams. Catch up; if you don't, it's your own fault." This, while ignoring the facts that smaller cities like Buffalo, Green Bay, Jacksonville, and Minneapolis don't have nearly the same potential sources of income...

[Arkady Renko]

I agree with you, but I don't see any way the Jerry Joneses and Dan Snyders of the world allow it to happen. They'd just say, "Hey, we make money because we know how to market our teams. Catch up; if you don't, it's your own fault." This, while ignoring the facts that smaller cities like Buffalo, Green Bay, Jacksonville, and Minneapolis don't have nearly the same potential sources of income...

 

And also ignoring that the same NFL that requires revenue sharing to keep up on-the-field competitiveness also protects their home markets from competitors.

[EndZoneCrew]

PFW writers = College dropouts......seriously...who the hell cares what they say! Don't they have a deadline on the "Brady suffers hangnail" story.....or the "off-track betting in the Himalayas"