EDM to lose 10-11, maybe less depending on the success of the Roadrunners. At least, that's what they said at the press conferences (I watched the EDM conf, not the CAL one, but saw that in a thread on calpuck - anyone confrim CAL's numbers for me?)
More interesting that they supposedly made money something like the last 4 years.....who said that again.......
During the PC today, LaForge said that the Oilers made about $6MM profit last year.
He also said that the 'cash call' of '01-'02 was $14MM and was to cover shortfalls caused mainly by the 62 cent dollar.
The Road Runners should mitigate this years losses to about $9MM.
Not sure, but I think he's talking Canadian $$.
Last edited by IceDragoon: 02-17-2005 at 09:25 AM.
During the PC today, LaForge said that the Oilers made about $6M profit last year.
He also said that the 'cash call' of '01-'02 was $14M and was to cover shortfalls caused by the 62 cent dollar.
The Road Runners should mitigate this years losses to about $9M.
Not sure, but I think he's talking Canadian $$.
6M????
I know the Heritage classic, but 6M without any playoffs?
The Oilers have posted net losses 4 out of the past 6 years, but most of them have been minimal (less than 1M).
The 6M is very encouraging...and does indicate with a new CBA, this team will be financially strong.
During the PC today, LaForge said that the Oilers made about $6M profit last year.
WTF is this? From the Sun last April:
Quote:
The club is expected to turn a small profit this season, largely as a result of $1.7 million net profit from the hugely successful Nov. 22 outdoor game that attracted 57,167 fans to Edmonton's frigid Commonwealth Stadium.
I would have figured that statement means say, $3MM tops. Now we're at a $6MM profit in a season where the Oilers didn't make the playoffs? I know that the Heritage Classic brought in $1.7MM, but even so, $4MM in a season when the Oilers missed the playoffs? What in the name of God is wrong with that?
I can accept that the players needed to move during this. I don't understand why so many fans are so sanguine about having been lied to by the NHL and the Oilers.
I would have figured that statement means say, $3MM tops. Now we're at a $6MM profit in a season where the Oilers didn't make the playoffs? I know that the Heritage Classic brought in $1.7MM, but even so, $4MM in a season when the Oilers missed the playoffs? What in the name of God is wrong with that?
I can accept that the players needed to move during this. I don't understand why so many fans are so sanguine about having been lied to by the NHL and the Oilers.
Ya, I think that at one point Nichols claimed that they had turned a loss last season.
Also I think he said that they expected to lose $ 14.5 M this year. IIRC Laforge actually made some sort of effort to break that down on the radio (because many fans were skeptical). Today he said they had budgetted to lose $11 M and looked to be actually in line to lose $9 to $9.5 M.
I would have figured that statement means say, $3MM tops. Now we're at a $6MM profit in a season where the Oilers didn't make the playoffs? I know that the Heritage Classic brought in $1.7MM, but even so, $4MM in a season when the Oilers missed the playoffs? What in the name of God is wrong with that?
I can accept that the players needed to move during this. I don't understand why so many fans are so sanguine about having been lied to by the NHL and the Oilers.
Untill someone, properly authorized by the Oilers ownership group, sits down and states on record what their complete income statement looked like for last season, its just quotes & numbers from various sources separated by timelines printed in different publications. I wouldn't go ahead and brand the Oilers organization liars untill actual numbers are quoted, not "expected" or "estimated" figures.
Untill someone, properly authorized by the Oilers ownership group, sits down and states on record what their complete income statement looked like for last season, its just quotes & numbers from various sources separated by timelines printed in different publications. I wouldn't go ahead and brand the Oilers organization liars untill actual numbers are quoted, not "expected" or "estimated" figures.
I don't know how much more authorized you can get than the President of the team. He's not properly authorized? I don't know what it will take for some of you people. I'd ask any of the people who follow the business side of the team closely and post here-people like xerburt, YK, igor etc. if they're surprised by this new figure. It's certainly the first I've ever heard of it.
As far as NHL ownership groups go, I think that the Oilers probably have one of the most honest, transparent and forthcoming groups. That's the effect of having 38 people in it, in a city as small as Edmonton. If their information is so fudged...why are people so willing to buy the NHL numbers?
I don't know how much more authorized you can get than the President of the team. He's not properly authorized? I don't know what it will take for some of you people. I'd ask any of the people who follow the business side of the team closely and post here-people like xerburt, YK, igor etc. if they're surprised by this new figure. It's certainly the first I've ever heard of it.
As far as NHL ownership groups go, I think that the Oilers probably have one of the most honest, transparent and forthcoming groups. That's the effect of having 38 people in it, in a city as small as Edmonton. If their information is so fudged...why are people so willing to buy the NHL numbers?
It isn't just the NHL numbers that are off. I believe the Forbes report had Edm listed as $1 million profit as well. I think a little laundering is going on, but you know, I don't really care. If the players were in a CBA deal where profits were tied to their revenue then of course that's a different matter. Let's take a look; 6 mill divided 38 ways = $157,894 per shareholder. Basically a little better than your average joe's wages. Big whoop. They could've made as much by simply having an average mutual fund.
Since the Nashville Preds showed a profit of roughly 6 mill (according to Forbes) with 3 home games in the playoffs I thought our Heritage Classic would've brought more than that (with 55,000 and all the merchandising et al), I guess not though.
I don't know how much more authorized you can get than the President of the team. He's not properly authorized? I don't know what it will take for some of you people. I'd ask any of the people who follow the business side of the team closely and post here-people like xerburt, YK, igor etc. if they're surprised by this new figure. It's certainly the first I've ever heard of it.
As far as NHL ownership groups go, I think that the Oilers probably have one of the most honest, transparent and forthcoming groups. That's the effect of having 38 people in it, in a city as small as Edmonton. If their information is so fudged...why are people so willing to buy the NHL numbers?
If I could have access to the same info Oilers make available to their accounting firm.............
Untill then, its quotes from different people at different times within the organization. And no, I dont think everyone on this board wears the same Oiler-tinted glasses. I think the issue could be jumping zealously to conclusions over pieces of information without having the benefit of seeing the whole picture.
I don't know how much more authorized you can get than the President of the team. He's not properly authorized? I don't know what it will take for some of you people. I'd ask any of the people who follow the business side of the team closely and post here-people like xerburt, YK, igor etc. if they're surprised by this new figure. It's certainly the first I've ever heard of it.
As far as NHL ownership groups go, I think that the Oilers probably have one of the most honest, transparent and forthcoming groups. That's the effect of having 38 people in it, in a city as small as Edmonton. If their information is so fudged...why are people so willing to buy the NHL numbers?
Personally I have always been a bit suspicious about the numbers that Cal Nichols and Pat Laforge throw out there on occasion. Though as an Oiler fan I am grateful that they purchased the team and kept them in Edmonton.
Hockey teams are in a funny situation ... if they are making a profit and aren't the champs fans will clamour for a higher payroll. If they declare significant profits, then go cap in hand to local government for a tax subsidy or some such ... doesn't work so well . You can see the reasons why all of them are a bit cagey about it. It is a private company, and they have absolutely no obligation to share details publicly ... but I'd rather that they didn't bandy about numbers at all , not unless they were prepared to substantiate them.
As far as the total league numbers go ... I see no reason to doubt the findings of Levitt and Turner. It would be fantastic to see the individual UROs ... but I doubt we will ever see that from a North American pro sports franchise, not in our lifetimes. Even just the revenues (in some defined form) of the individual teams would be great.
Though as an Oiler fan I am grateful that they purchased the team and kept them in Edmonton.
Me too. If I give that impression sometimes, it's unintentional. They stepped up when it looked pretty bleak. They're owed a thank you for that. It doesn't mean I have to swallow what they say when they make inconsistent public statements.
Quote:
... but I'd rather that they didn't bandy about numbers at all , not unless they were prepared to substantiate them.
Agreed, 100%. It bothers me that people take their numbers as fact, and justify their acceptance of what the owners are saying based on it, particularly when the owners are so ****ing inconsistent in what they say.
Quote:
As far as the total league numbers go ... I see no reason to doubt the findings of Levitt and Turner.
Bettman has a real problem in terms of overplaying his hand. The Levitt Report-it may well be accurate. I don't know. I don't trust it though. If I'm the players, I wouldn't trust it. If Bettman and Co. wanted to have a report that they could bang on the table-do an effing real audit. That report is not an audit. Bettman tried to sell it as an audit, and it blew up on him.
Even if you accept the numbers as fact, I think that there are still serious questions because I don't think that the league wide numbers matter all that much. I've read in a bunch of places that 3/4 of those losses can be attributed to the Blues, Rangers and Caps. The NHL isn't a single entity-it's 30 entities, and looking at the league wide picture just isn't that relevant.
Quote:
It would be fantastic to see the individual UROs ... but I doubt we will ever see that from a North American pro sports franchise, not in our lifetimes. Even just the revenues (in some defined form) of the individual teams would be great.
$157,894 per shareholder........ They could've made as much by simply having an average mutual fund.
Boy would I like a piece of that "average" mutual fund!
Personally, I'm skeptical of any figures thrown out for public consumption if they aren't backed up by the relevant documentation. Since I'll likely never see the books of any professional hockey club, I'll take all figures bandied about with a lump of salt.
The $6M figure does come out of left field for me, as anything I've ever heard up until now has been a generic "slight profit". Perhaps $6M is "slight", for a multimillion dollar operation, but anything I've read has pointed to ~$1M.
The only reasoning I can come up with is that the team had an gross profit of ~$6M and a net profit of ~$1M. (provided that player-related expenses are determined to be directly tied in to the cost of the "product")
...
Bettman has a real problem in terms of overplaying his hand. The Levitt Report-it may well be accurate. I don't know. I don't trust it though. If I'm the players, I wouldn't trust it.
Frankly, if you were a player you likely wouldn't have a hope in hell of understanding it. You would probably turn to your agent or player rep for advice ... if you cared enough to even do that.
Quote:
If Bettman and Co. wanted to have a report that they could bang on the table-do an effing real audit. That report is not an audit. Bettman tried to sell it as an audit, and it blew up on him.
When did it blow up on him?
I'm not being snide, I honestly don't know what you are talking about. From Levitt:
For the 2002-2003 season we requested that the NHL have each team obtain an audit of
its financial statements by an independent public accounting firm and have its
independent auditor issue a supplementary audit report on the URO’s summary statement
of operations (Schedule I) and the schedule of related-party transactions (Schedule XII). 1An example of the supplementary audit report requested by the NHL is contained in Appendix F. The form of this report is in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. We requested the report in order to ensure that the information in the URO was subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the ndependent auditor’s audit of the financial statements and, in the opinion of the auditor, is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the financial statements taken as a whole.
Quote:
Even if you accept the numbers as fact, I think that there are still serious questions because I don't think that the league wide numbers matter all that much. I've read in a bunch of places that 3/4 of those losses can be attributed to the Blues, Rangers and Caps. The NHL isn't a single entity-it's 30 entities, and looking at the league wide picture just isn't that relevant.
Where did you read this mudcrutch? It makes no sense to me.
According to the NHLPA's revenue list STL are about evens with EDM's and their player payroll was about USD 30M higher in 02/03 ... that's a really significant 30M ish loss, probably worst in the league with the possible exception of WSH ... but it's still a pretty small slice of the total losses.
There are a bunch of teams who almost certainly lost at least some money last year, unless they had the best stadium deals imagineable ANA, L.A, FLA, T.B, PHX, ATL, CAR, NSH, BUF, OTT, PIT off of the top of my head.
The NHL, as a whole, has been a very unhealthy business of late. And it would be even worse if not for the fact that the new CBA negotiation gave owners and fans a reason to struggle through.
Or as many have suggested, maybe the NHLPA needs to start taking a serious look at the books as Bettman has suggested the NHL has offered. My intiution tells me that to go forward, that's what needs to be done next.
The spooky thing was, as I was thinking that, I watched a segment on TSN where Burke and Healy pretty much agreed on that exact idea. I had to shake my head to make sure I was actually awake
Patrick LaForge would have to be a stupid man to lie to the media/fans.
Stupid, he is not.
I would suggest that the most current numbers are the most complete numbers.
And, any amounts stated at previous times were incomplete.
Another thing Patrick said today, was that the other years were basically "break even", marginal losses or profits.
Let's not forget that these owners dug into their pockets to keep our team here.
They then covered a significant "cash call" a few years later.
They are currently contributing the funds to remain "operational" thru the lockout, to ensure that the Oilers can compete once they get back on the ice.
And, they are all "paying customers" of their own team.
They love Edmonton and believe the Oilers make the city a better place to live and do business.
I'm sure they get a kick out of owning an NHL team, who wouldn't?
Far be it from me, to begrudge them making a modest profit.
So far, "break even" years aside...
'01 - '02... - $14MM
'03 - '04... + $6MM
'04 - '05... - $9MM
'05 - '06... - $???
Doesn't look like profit to me, yet.
The team also had to give $10MM to the NHL "warchest".
My hunch is that...
Some of the owners "loaned" that money to the team and the team had to pay the money back, over a few years.
We don't know the revenues or expenses.
We can only guess.
The NHLPA have been given access to this info and choose not to know.
Boy would I like a piece of that "average" mutual fund!
Personally, I'm skeptical of any figures thrown out for public consumption if they aren't backed up by the relevant documentation. Since I'll likely never see the books of any professional hockey club, I'll take all figures bandied about with a lump of salt.
The $6M figure does come out of left field for me, as anything I've ever heard up until now has been a generic "slight profit". Perhaps $6M is "slight", for a multimillion dollar operation, but anything I've read has pointed to ~$1M.
The only reasoning I can come up with is that the team had an gross profit of ~$6M and a net profit of ~$1M. (provided that player-related expenses are determined to be directly tied in to the cost of the "product")
Possible, I suppose - but who really knows?
$6M profit? I'm flabbergasted about this. I think a lot of people on here thought this was coming somehow, but I'm more than a little shocked that we got it now and in this fashion. We had a couple of threads in the past month where we tried to beat the Oilers cost structure to death when Nichols "leaked" the CAN$80M revenue figure and sure enough it looked like there was going to be something left over.
On one hand, it's very good news. It just confirms that this franchise in this city is rock solid. However, the EIG and even Kevin Lowe have done a fair amount of fearmongering ever since they've taken over and this shoots them full of holes. Unfortunately, I'm not sure they'll get grilled as they deserve.
xerburt, any chance we're talking economic vs. accounting profit here? As you say, who knows what these leaked numbers mean without context. Assuming they're even correct.
I just want to be sure that I've got my terminology correct here. Accounting profit: Doesn't take into account such things as capital costs. Economic profit: does. Is that correct?
It's inexplicable that they'd drop this today...absolutely bizarre. If anyone from the Oilers office reads this board-please archive the thing on your website, I'd like to listen to it.
I just want to be sure that I've got my terminology correct here. Accounting profit: Doesn't take into account such things as capital costs. Economic profit: does. Is that correct?
It's inexplicable that they'd drop this today...absolutely bizarre. If anyone from the Oilers office reads this board-please archive the thing on your website, I'd like to listen to it.
Yup, that's my understanding. Cost of capital, opportunity cost, whatever you want to call it. I can't believe Nichols threatened Edmonton mere weeks ago and now this comes out.
$6M profit? I'm flabbergasted about this. I think a lot of people on here thought this was coming somehow, but I'm more than a little shocked that we got it now and in this fashion. We had a couple of threads in the past month where we tried to beat the Oilers cost structure to death when Nichols "leaked" the CAN$80M revenue figure and sure enough it looked like there was going to be something left over.
On one hand, it's very good news. It just confirms that this franchise in this city is rock solid. However, the EIG and even Kevin Lowe have done a fair amount of fearmongering ever since they've taken over and this shoots them full of holes. Unfortunately, I'm not sure they'll get grilled as they deserve.
xerburt, any chance we're talking economic vs. accounting profit here? As you say, who knows what these leaked numbers mean without context. Assuming they're even correct.
To me the curious thing was the way it was presented. I heard this part of the PC, and it wasn't pried out of LaForge, he offered it up. This was a well prepared speech.
So. Why? Is this an honest number? And if so, why on Earth do they throw it out there now? Strange stuff.
.
Wildarse Theory:
The NHL intends to release the bottom lines in terms of net revenue for all 30 teams individually, at some point in the near future. In a manner that is both convincing and compelling. Reviewed by independent auditors (WTH, use the same firm that the NHLPA currently use to audit NHL team gate revenues). Thus allowing the players to see that 99% of the business types on TV agree these numbers are legit ... and that their agents and their Player's Association have been misleading them.
So with this on the horizon, the Oilers decided to come clean about it now.
.
More likely it's just a random thing. But my theory is more fun.
To me the curious thing was the way it was presented. I heard this part of the PC, and it wasn't pried out of LaForge, he offered it up. This was a well prepared speech.
So. Why? Is this an honest number? And if so, why on Earth do they throw it out there now? Strange stuff.
.
Wildarse Theory:
The NHL intends to release the bottom lines in terms of net revenue for all 30 teams individually, at some point in the near future. In a manner that is both convincing and compelling. Reviewed by independent auditors (WTH, use the same firm that the NHLPA currently use to audit NHL team gate revenues). Thus allowing the players to see that 99% of the business types on TV agree these numbers are legit ... and that their agents and their Player's Association have been misleading them.
So with this on the horizon, the Oilers decided to come clean about it now.
.
More likely it's just a random thing. But my theory is more fun.
Not a bad theory at all. At this point I don't think it hurts anybody really. Chicago and Boston fans will be royally choked but so be it. I really can't think of a good reason not to release this stuff. This board wasn't even close to having the pieces necessary, but could put forth a reasonable guess regarding the Oilers' finances. I'm sure a lot of the serious fans (a la season ticket holders) can do the same for their own teams. Is there a real bad side to this that I'm not seeing?
Nevertheless, if it happens as you're guessing it will be a fascinating read.
. You can see the reasons why all of them are a bit cagey about it. It is a private company, and they have absolutely no obligation to share details publicly ... but I'd rather that they didn't bandy about numbers at all , not unless they were prepared to substantiate them.
ANA, L.A, FLA, T.B, PHX, ATL, CAR, NSH, BUF, OTT, PIT off of the top of my head.
