Blues finances

[crazyhorse]

http://thehockeywriters.com/inconceivab ... -a-profit/

[JesusNEVERexisted]

Wow! I had no idea it's that bad! It actually says it's time to panic and if the Blues are sold again they will move! Being financially even worse off than Phoenix is scary!



In 2006, the Blues were ranked as the 16th most valuable NHL franchise out of 30 teams, valued at $150 million. By 2012, the Blues had dropped to DEAD LAST in the league. And despite moving up to number 28 in 2013, the Blues are still worth less than the likes of the Arizona Coyotes, the Florida Panthers, the Carolina Hurricanes, and the Nashville Predators, to name a few.

Just let that sink in for a second:

The Blues are doing worse than the NHL’s most godforsaken hockey wasteland (Phoenix), a place so toxic the NHL itself had to step in and run the team

Yikes.

Even more alarming, the Blues have already been sold twice in the last 8 ½ years. In 2006, after losing the GDP of a small country (the Blues lost $91 million over the previous five years, by far the biggest loss in the NHL), billionaire Bill Laurie had had enough. In stepped Dave Checketts. And in 2006, the Bluesactually made money for the first time in a long time, ending up a whopping $1 million in the black.

But it was not to last.

[glen a richter]

I don't know what a ticket goes for now, but when I went to stc during the wasteland of the Andy Murray days (think Dan Hinote) it was dirt cheap to get two seats down low in the 100s. If you want to make money as a franchise, you have to charge money. A good team will draw fans regardless of the ticket price. Best bargain in town means you'll be out of town soon.

[dmiles2186]

Couple issues with this article. Yes, I know the finances are bad. But it doesn't mention anywhere that Stillman has said up front that the main goal is to get the Blues back on financially stable ground. It also doesn't mention that Stillman has said that just because they spend on more expensive players, doesn't mean they can't trim the fat on the business side of things.

Letting JD and his gaudy salary go? That's just one example of how they're trying to trim costs on that side of the line. Also, we all used to think the calendars they handed out opening night were pretty awesome. Now they're glorified Ford ads. But it's a revenue stream. Brett Hull whoring himself out to anyone who will listen? It's to work up revenue streams.

Stillman and Co. were boned HARD by that stupid concessions deal Checketts made in his time here. That's part of the reason why the value of the franchise has plummeted, because they're not making money in places that other teams are. But the thing is, if the Blues get a deep playoff run in them, this team will turn a profit. The league doesn't want to lose the St. Louis market. The building is fantastic. The support is great. The team isn't plagued with the problems that most teams up for relocation are. It's simply a matter of righting the ship in certain areas and Stillman has acknowledged that and is working to do so.

[goon attack]

Winning creates revenue. Moving the team to some other podunk town isn't going to guarantee jack shit.

[JesusNEVERexisted]

Winning creates revenue. Moving the team to some other podunk town isn't going to guarantee jack shit.

Seattle or KC aren't podunk towns and both want an NHL team.

[cardsfan04]

Winning creates revenue. Moving the team to some other podunk town isn't going to guarantee jack shit.

Seattle or KC aren't podunk towns and both want an NHL team.

Most of the time I ignore you, but just shut up. Seriously. Don't stir this shit up. That's all you're doing right now. Stop trolling.

[JesusNEVERexisted]

You're in denial and YOU need to shut up TROLL!

There was even a Blues round table discussion on KMOX a few years ago when ownership changed hands from Checketts to Stillman. They said Blues have NEVER had stable ownership and if they keep having a musical chairs of ownership by switching owners every few years they won't last long term here.

They also discussed how some bigger metro areas without NHL teams could be attractive targets for the Blues.

[cprice12]

It seems very little research went into this article. Nothing really in depth, just surface stuff. Meh.

And one of the user comments:

unfortunately as a saint louisan i realized long ago the nhl has no business being in saint louis.

Uh...wut? That comment makes no sense whatsoever. Grossly...just...wrong.

[ecbm]

Other considerations aside, I don't get the feeling this writer understands the context of the organization over the last 10-15 years just based on his comment about Laurie having "had enough". Enough of what? Asset-stripping? The club is still recovering from his "ownership". F'in carpetbagger.

He also looks past implications of his own data: $91M in loss from 2001-2006 ($18.2M avg, including a work stoppage year) to losing "between $2 and $10M" every season since. That seems like improvement, but ok. Also, apparently, Stillman should have moved the team because that definitely would have fixed its finances (like with the Whalers and original Jets). And, I mean, bidding wars? In the era of salary caps and revenue sharing? Also: no mention of all those years when we had among the (sometimes THE) lowest payrolls in the league? Finally, this guy doesn't get the most fundamental fact of the situation facing most teams in pro sports: the most realistic way, the way that ownership/management has the most power to affect, to improve your brand and revenue and get bigger sponsorships is TO WIN. That's why he's increasing payroll.

this looks incredibly foolish

And yet, why do imagine he doesn't say this about the Blackhawks tying up about 30% of their cap in two players? Because they win. Because that's all that matters and if you do it, all these other considerations become unimportant.

I mean, what a dbag. Again, he attributes solid intentions to Laurie but speculates that Stillman wants to run the team into the ground to grease the rails for a move (if he does want to do this, he should just phone Kroenke and Fisher to get their blueprint). Based on what again? The idea that moving to either 1.) a city with no building that won't build one until they get an NBA franchise, 2.) a city that's never had a pro sports franchise at all, has no hockey culture and where the league doesn't want a team or 3.) an even smaller market across the same state will guarantee an increase in income?

Also, great that he links to documents that you can't view. Makes his argument seem even more sound.

[ecbm]

Winning creates revenue. Moving the team to some other podunk town isn't going to guarantee jack shit.

Seattle or KC aren't podunk towns and both want an NHL team.

KC is every bit as podunk as StL if not more so. Not judging, I like KC. Seattle has no building and won't build one until they get an NBA franchise. Neither is a more attractive option.

How those 'cubbies looking for next year?

[not_a_wings_fan]

I would LOVE a team in KC and the Sprint Center needs an anchor tenant... but there's no way the NHL can make it in KC at this point. MAYBE if they were given an instant cup winner like Colorado was... but even then there are many, many options and I don't see the youth hockey to support the interest.

As I recall there are issues with the way STL set up their building lease, concessions, and parking that are causing these revenue issues. It isn't a matter of selling tickets and gear or their TV revenue. Does anyone else understand it that way as well?

[dmiles2186]

As I recall there are issues with the way STL set up their building lease, concessions, and parking that are causing these revenue issues. It isn't a matter of selling tickets and gear or their TV revenue. Does anyone else understand it that way as well?

That's what I gather too. It's not that their TV deal is bad, it's just not great, but they still get money there. The big thing is that the team doesn't receive money in certain areas, concessions and parking included, that other teams do and that's the big issue. That all goes back to Checketts making that crippling move where he cut the deal to get a bunch of money up front in exchange for getting nothing down the line.

http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/prin ... l?page=all

One deal that Stillman can’t change is the Blues’ concession agreement with Levy Restaurants. Stillman was at the table as a minority owner when former Blues majority owner Dave Checketts negotiated a 20-year deal that included a revenue sharing clause that was front loaded, giving the team smaller commissions on concession sales for the remaining 15 years.

Actually, read that whole article. It talks about a bunch of stuff that Stillman has done to set the team on a financially stable path. Article is a year old but cites more specifics than the article in the original post.

[APOD]

As I recall there are issues with the way STL set up their building lease, concessions, and parking that are causing these revenue issues. It isn't a matter of selling tickets and gear or their TV revenue. Does anyone else understand it that way as well?

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/hockey/p ... d9933.html

Several things we don't own the parking garage, we are paying off the debt of the Peabody opera house instead of paying an amusement tax per ticket sold (bites us in the ass in a lockout year or a low ticket sale year), levy restaurant's shitty contract till 2028 (I wonder how much we would have to pay to break contract), I love FSMW but their contract was front loaded too.

[JesusNEVERexisted]

Wow, I didn't know the Blues had 3 levels of vice presidents! Glad they have really streamlined their staff to save money. If the Blues ever threaten to move or fold again the city has to do something about that amusement tax and the parking.

Stillman said parking is a HUGE revenue source they don't get. When Stillman got Scottrade why didn't the parking garage come with it like every other NHL team?

[Winning Unlimited]

Part of the cost of keeping the Blues was the investment of an AHL affiliate. And, the Peoria Riverman are no longer. The Blues also (nearly) sell out each night. Also, the revenue sharing keeps the Blues competitive. Best of all, the Blues don't have any bad contracts.

[JesusNEVERexisted]

What do you mean? They have the bad concessions and FSMW contracts which were both front loaded.

[glen a richter]

What do you mean? They have the bad concessions and FSMW contracts which were both front loaded.

Player contracts, you halfwit.

[STLADOGG]

What do you mean? They have the bad concessions and FSMW contracts which were both front loaded.

Player contracts, you halfwit.

I appreciate the guy entertaining us all off-season, but the troll can leave now.

[tjk002]

Wow, I didn't know the Blues had 3 levels of vice presidents! Glad they have really streamlined their staff to save money. If the Blues ever threaten to move or fold again the city has to do something about that amusement tax and the parking.

Stillman said parking is a HUGE revenue source they don't get. When Stillman got Scottrade why didn't the parking garage come with it like every other NHL team?

The city owns the parking garage and the debt on the building if I recall correctly. The debt repayment terms were brutal. Plus, if you really want to know why the Blues are in the shape they are, it goes back to the days of the idiot mayor Vince Schoemel. The brewery offered to build the Blues a new building at their cost for naming rights alone. It was to be built where the rehabbed Cupples wharehouses sit. Schoemel got them all protected as historic landmarks and couldnt be demolished.

Stillman is not going to sell the Blues. He's in it for the long haul but the Ott and Berglund contract certainly didn't help matters.