Page 2 of 23 FirstFirst 1234 12 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 221
  1. #11
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,604
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The economy and two money-losing teams

    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    "Ltrey" wrote:
    Yes but think of how much this team would be worth with a brand new, $800M stadium in freaking Los Angeles. Wilf would be ROLLING in it if he moved the team.

    We are in a dire situation Vikings fans...
    Good point. We should hurry up and buy Wilf a stadium so he can roll in his money here.
    Why are you so extreme?
    There doesn't have to be a 100% publicly funded stadium or a 100% privately funded stadium.
    The state of Minnesota doesn't have to "buy" Wilf anything.
    But if it wants to keep the Vikings in Minnesota, it is going to have to offer something.
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

  2. #12
    marstc09's Avatar
    marstc09 is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona
    Posts
    23,180

    Re: The economy and two money-losing teams

    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "VikingMike" wrote:
    "marstc09" wrote:
    Also, it's only fair to point out that Forbes now considers the Vikings to be worth $839 million, or about 30 percent more than the $600 million Wilf paid for it. If and when he sells, Wilf likely will get all of his money back -- and then some.
    This is a good sign!

    Yes, that is a good sign...it's also a 40% increase in value.
    It is a horrible sign.
    Negative yearly revenue with an increase in net worth means that Wilf would do much better to sell the Vikings than keep them.
    How do you consider that
    a good sign?

    Think of it this way.
    Let's say you buy a house for $300k in 2006.
    In the past three years, you have sunk an additional $25k into it for upkeep, remodeling, etc.
    The net value of the house is currently $419k.
    Does that mean that you have an extra $119k lying around?
    Nope, you are still in the red for the $25k.
    You will NOT recoup that money unless you sell the house.


    This is where Wilf is at.
    He can't continue to pump additional capitol into the Vikings indefinately.
    Eventually the organization will have to become self supporting or he will be forced to sell the team.
    The way to get the team to a self supporting state is to build a new stadium.
    Whether done privately or publicly, it needs to be done or the team will move.
    Umm that is exactly the point. He needs to build a new stadium. LA has already proved to be a bad market for the NFL. Why would he take it there? Why not keep it in a place that has a history and a current fan base? There are too many unknowns in moving to a different city. Wilf is no dummy and understands that LA teams already failed. There is at least hope in Minnesota. Again this is a good sign IMO!

  3. #13
    VikingMike's Avatar
    VikingMike is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    5,820

    Re: The economy and two money-losing teams

    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "VikingMike" wrote:
    "marstc09" wrote:
    Also, it's only fair to point out that Forbes now considers the Vikings to be worth $839 million, or about 30 percent more than the $600 million Wilf paid for it. If and when he sells, Wilf likely will get all of his money back -- and then some.
    This is a good sign!

    Yes, that is a good sign...it's also a 40% increase in value.
    It is a horrible sign.
    Negative yearly revenue with an increase in net worth means that Wilf would do much better to sell the Vikings than keep them.
    How do you consider that
    a good sign?

    Think of it this way.
    Let's say you buy a house for $300k in 2006.
    In the past three years, you have sunk an additional $25k into it for upkeep, remodeling, etc.
    The net value of the house is currently $419k.
    Does that mean that you have an extra $119k lying around?
    Nope, you are still in the red for the $25k.
    You will NOT recoup that money unless you sell the house.


    This is where Wilf is at.
    He can't continue to pump additional capitol into the Vikings indefinately.
    Eventually the organization will have to become self supporting or he will be forced to sell the team.
    The way to get the team to a self supporting state is to build a new stadium.
    Whether done privately or publicly, it needs to be done or the team will move.

    Yes, I understand that. But certainly a 40% increase in value is better than any decrease in net worth, no? And yes, without a stadium deal all bets are off...then there would be no question he would probably do better moving the team elsewhere. I'm just hoping a) he gets the MN stadium done, and b) in the meantime he can continue convincing his business partners to fork over $.
    Any man who afflicts the human race with ideas must be prepared to see them misunderstood. - H.L. Mencken

    Come from the land of the ice and snow...

  4. #14
    gregair13's Avatar
    gregair13 is online now Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    14,596

    Re: The economy and two money-losing teams

    LA would not support a team.
    We're bringing purple back.

  5. #15
    jmcdon00's Avatar
    jmcdon00 is offline Jersey Retired Snake Champion, Moto Trial Fest 2: Mountain Pack Champion, LL City Truck 2 Champion, Arithmetic sequence Champion, Troops Tower Defense Champion
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    8,281

    Re: The economy and two money-losing teams

    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "VikingMike" wrote:
    "marstc09" wrote:
    Also, it's only fair to point out that Forbes now considers the Vikings to be worth $839 million, or about 30 percent more than the $600 million Wilf paid for it. If and when he sells, Wilf likely will get all of his money back -- and then some.
    This is a good sign!

    Yes, that is a good sign...it's also a 40% increase in value.
    It is a horrible sign.
    Negative yearly revenue with an increase in net worth means that Wilf would do much better to sell the Vikings than keep them.
    How do you consider that
    a good sign?

    Think of it this way.
    Let's say you buy a house for $300k in 2006.
    In the past three years, you have sunk an additional $25k into it for upkeep, remodeling, etc.
    The net value of the house is currently $419k.
    Does that mean that you have an extra $119k lying around?
    Nope, you are still in the red for the $25k.
    You will NOT recoup that money unless you sell the house.


    This is where Wilf is at.
    He can't continue to pump additional capitol into the Vikings indefinately.
    Eventually the organization will have to become self supporting or he will be forced to sell the team.
    The way to get the team to a self supporting state is to build a new stadium.
    Whether done privately or publicly, it needs to be done or the team will move.
    He could do like most American's and take out a second mortgage with his newly found equity.
    I seriously doubt wilf is too concerned about the cash flow. He knows he is building wealth and the team will likely continue to rise in value, meanwhile he is using the "paper loss" as
    a tax write off, keeping millions of tax dollars in his pocket until he sells.
    Not to mention much of that 50 million additional it says he has invested went towards things like signing bonuses that will save money in coming years(like Jared allen signing bonus). According to Forbes the Vikings had more income than expences by about 20million in 2007.

  6. #16
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,604
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The economy and two money-losing teams

    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "VikingMike" wrote:
    "marstc09" wrote:
    Also, it's only fair to point out that Forbes now considers the Vikings to be worth $839 million, or about 30 percent more than the $600 million Wilf paid for it. If and when he sells, Wilf likely will get all of his money back -- and then some.
    This is a good sign!

    Yes, that is a good sign...it's also a 40% increase in value.
    It is a horrible sign.
    Negative yearly revenue with an increase in net worth means that Wilf would do much better to sell the Vikings than keep them.
    How do you consider that
    a good sign?

    Think of it this way.
    Let's say you buy a house for $300k in 2006.
    In the past three years, you have sunk an additional $25k into it for upkeep, remodeling, etc.
    The net value of the house is currently $419k.
    Does that mean that you have an extra $119k lying around?
    Nope, you are still in the red for the $25k.
    You will NOT recoup that money unless you sell the house.


    This is where Wilf is at.
    He can't continue to pump additional capitol into the Vikings indefinately.
    Eventually the organization will have to become self supporting or he will be forced to sell the team.
    The way to get the team to a self supporting state is to build a new stadium.
    Whether done privately or publicly, it needs to be done or the team will move.
    He could do like most American's and take out a second mortgage with his newly found equity.
    I seriously doubt wilf is too concerned about the cash flow. He knows he is building wealth and the team will likely continue to rise in value, meanwhile he is using the "paper loss" as
    a tax write off, keeping millions of tax dollars in his pocket until he sells.
    Not to mention much of that 50 million additional it says he has invested went towards things like signing bonuses that will save money in coming years(like Jared allen signing bonus). According to Forbes the Vikings had more income than expences by about 20million in 2007.
    Actually the operating income was $18.9 million.
    I know you were just rounding, but $1.1 million is a lot of money.

    And it is important to point out that the Vikings made $18.9 million in 2007.
    It doesn't mean that Wilf made $18.9 million off from the Vikings.
    Given the fact that Wilf and his partners had to borrow most of the $600 million to buy the team, any net revenue made by the Vikings would likely go toward repaying borrowed capitol.
    I honestly doubt that $18.9 would be enough to cover the annual payment, and it certainly didn't cover the additional $20 million Wilf needed to take out in additional capitol requests in 2008.

    You are suffering from the misconception that Wilf is making money hand over fist from the Vikings.
    He most likely is not.
    In fact, from a business point of view, the Vikings are a very bad business investment for Wilf, and will continue to be so until a new stadium is built.

    BTW, here is the analysis from Forbes regarding the Vikings:
    http://www.forbes.com/lists/2008/30/sportsmoney_nfl08_Minnesota-Vikings_309201.html
    The skinny
    It looks like the Minnesota Vikings will not be getting a new stadium any time soon unless team owner Zigi Wilf is willing to forgo large taxpayer subsidies. In April the state Senate turned down a proposal for a $2 million study on how to replace the Metrodome with a $954 million stadium 75% funded by taxpayers. That is bad news for Wilf, who has borrowed a lot of money to buy and operate the team. The Vikings have one of the worst stadium deals in the NFL and Wilf, who along with other partners paid $600 million for the team three years ago, have pumped at least $30 million more into the franchise since their purchase. It is not likely that the Vikings can privately finance a new stadium like the Giants and Jets are doing in New Jersey because of the weaker demographics in Minneapolis. So look for Wilf to unload the team.
    Also, take a look at the operating income from 2006 (reported in 2007).

    In 2007 the Vikigns had a operating income of -$19 million.
    In 2008 they had an operating income of +$19 million.
    Sound like they are barely breaking even to me. And I have a feeling that with the money we put toward our free agents last offseason, I think we are going to be back in the negative when the 08 numbers are released.

    Your problem is that you feel that anyone making more money that you consider average is loaded and swimming in pools of money like Scrooge McDuck.
    I think you need to take a closer look at what is really going on.
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

  7. #17
    jmcdon00's Avatar
    jmcdon00 is offline Jersey Retired Snake Champion, Moto Trial Fest 2: Mountain Pack Champion, LL City Truck 2 Champion, Arithmetic sequence Champion, Troops Tower Defense Champion
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    8,281

    Re: The economy and two money-losing teams

    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    "Ltrey" wrote:
    Yes but think of how much this team would be worth with a brand new, $800M stadium in freaking Los Angeles. Wilf would be ROLLING in it if he moved the team.

    We are in a dire situation Vikings fans...
    Good point. We should hurry up and buy Wilf a stadium so he can roll in his money here.
    Why are you so extreme?
    There doesn't have to be a 100% publicly funded stadium or a 100% privately funded stadium.
    The state of Minnesota doesn't have to "buy" Wilf anything.
    But if it wants to keep the Vikings in Minnesota, it is going to have to offer something.
    I know that it is not 100%. I'm just saying that what ever public money is put into it is going to line Wilf's pockets. If the state commits 500million Wilf would easily increase his networth by $250million over night. In case you don't believe me look at the forbes list before and after a team gets approved for a publicly financed stadium. Much of it goes right into the owners personal wealth. (the value of the twins has more than doubled since a stadium was approved).
    I know there are benefits for the state, and other local teams have got stadiums, and other NFL teams have gotten stadiums, but the fact remains that it is going to make an already rich man even more rich, at the taxpayers expense. Of course others will benefit too, like the players who get a percentage of NFL revenue, so a new stadium will mean higher taxes for average workers and higher salaries for men who already make millions playing a childs game.

  8. #18
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,604
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The economy and two money-losing teams

    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    "Ltrey" wrote:
    Yes but think of how much this team would be worth with a brand new, $800M stadium in freaking Los Angeles. Wilf would be ROLLING in it if he moved the team.

    We are in a dire situation Vikings fans...
    Good point. We should hurry up and buy Wilf a stadium so he can roll in his money here.
    Why are you so extreme?
    There doesn't have to be a 100% publicly funded stadium or a 100% privately funded stadium.
    The state of Minnesota doesn't have to "buy" Wilf anything.
    But if it wants to keep the Vikings in Minnesota, it is going to have to offer something.
    I know that it is not 100%. I'm just saying that what ever public money is put into it is going to line Wilf's pockets. If the state commits 500million Wilf would easily increase his networth by $250million over night. In case you don't believe me look at the forbes list before and after a team gets approved for a publicly financed stadium. Much of it goes right into the owners personal wealth. (the value of the twins has more than doubled since a stadium was approved).
    I know there are benefits for the state, and other local teams have got stadiums, and other NFL teams have gotten stadiums, but the fact remains that it is going to make an already rich man even more rich, at the taxpayers expense. Of course others will benefit too, like the players who get a percentage of NFL revenue, so a new stadium will mean higher taxes for average workers and higher salaries for men who already make millions playing a childs game.
    And here we go again...
    It is almost like you have a grudge against Wilf because he is successful.

    Yes, a new stadium would make the Vikings profitable, which would in turn make money for Wilf.
    What do you want to happen?
    I know, you want Wilf to build it himself - despite the fact that he doesn't have the capitol to do so (Even Forbes specified this).
    Maybe he should go to his money tree in his back yard and pluck a shiny new $1 billion from it and buid the stadium.
    Sorry, but there is no money tree.
    Wilf had to borrow the money to buy the Vikings, and he has to pay that money back too.

    We don't need a new stadium to "make a rich man richer."
    We need a new stadium so a rich man stops losing money so he doesn't sell the team to someone who is less committed to keeping it in Minnesota.
    Wilf didn't get rich by sticking with poor investments.

    Let's look at the facts.
    1) The Vikings need a new stadium so that they can afford to have a competitive payroll.
    2) Wilf and his partners cannot afford to finance the stadium privately.
    3) There are other locales where the NFL franchise could likely be more profitable.
    4) There are other people who would be willing to purchase an NFL franchise, who may have their own dreams of where they will play.

    So what do you propose?
    If you are still proposing that Wilf privately finance a stadium, then you are basically proposing that he sell the team.
    I know that the state of Minnesota is in a tough spot right now, but that doesn't change the fact that the Vikigns need a new stadium.
    I am willing to bet that Wilf would be willing to stay the course if he had some kind of good will indication from the state of Minnesota that efforts will be made to help finance the stadium in the future.
    If too many people share your anti-rich bias, then quite simply, the team will move, and it will be exactly what the state deserves.
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

  9. #19
    jessejames09's Avatar
    jessejames09 is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    4,233

    Re: The economy and two money-losing teams

    "NodakPaul" wrote:


    Your problem is that you feel that anyone making more money that you consider average is loaded and swimming in pools of money like Scrooge McDuck.
    Wilf, could theoretically, be swimming in pools of money, but I imagine it would take more than a few money filled pools to add up to a billion.

  10. #20
    BadlandsVikings's Avatar
    BadlandsVikings is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    26,572

    Re: The economy and two money-losing teams

    When is the last time a pro sports team completely folded?

Page 2 of 23 FirstFirst 1234 12 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Big Teams Keep Losing
    By ultravikingfan in forum College Ball
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 09-28-2008, 08:34 AM
  2. All those T-shirts of losing teams? Off to Africa.
    By Zeus in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-25-2007, 02:12 PM
  3. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 06-19-2007, 08:09 AM
  4. The Money, Money, Money!! & Asst Coaches
    By FedjeViking in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 74
    Last Post: 01-11-2006, 04:31 PM
  5. All NFL teams Cap Money
    By SacredStar in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 02-04-2005, 11:06 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •