Page 3 of 23 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 221
  1. #21
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,602
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The economy and two money-losing teams

    "jessejames09" wrote:
    "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.
    Lol.



    Good HS math question.
    Given that the average displacement of a penny including the fiction displacement around it is about 20 cubic mm, how much money would it take to fill up a 10 X 15 X 4 meter pool...

    EDIT: The answer is probably about $300 million in pennies.
    But if he wanted nickles, then he would break the $1 billion mark... ;D
    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. #22
    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:
    "jessejames09" wrote:
    "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.
    Lol.



    Good HS math question.
    Given that the average displacement of a penny including the fiction displacement around it is about 20 cubic mm, how much money would it take to fill up a 10 X 15 X 4 meter pool...
    Well lets pretend this is a HS math question. My answer would have to be;

    "You're really gonna stink after swimming in all those pennies."

  3. #23
    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
    8,278

    Re: The economy and two money-losing teams

    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "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.
    I have no problem with people making money. Make a trillion dollars if you want, I don't care. But when you want to tax me to make your next hundred million I have a problem with it.
    And if he wanted to I'm sure he could easily fill his swimming pool with money and swim in it. This is what 900 million dollars would look like.
    [img width=450 height=365]http://87billion.com/seven.jpg[/img]
    http://87billion.com/

  4. #24
    Purple Floyd's Avatar
    Purple Floyd is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    16,646
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The economy and two money-losing teams

    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "VikingMike" wrote:
    [quote author=marstc09 link=topic=50354.msg902237#msg902237 date=1233170054]
    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.
    I have no problem with people making money. Make a trillion dollars if you want, I don't care. But when you want to tax me to make your next hundred million I have a problem with it.
    And if he wanted to I'm sure he could easily fill his swimming pool with money and swim in it. This is what 900 million dollars would look like.
    [img width=450 height=365]http://87billion.com/seven.jpg[/img]
    http://87billion.com/
    [/quote]

    It may look on paper like he is losing money but the value of franchises has been rising exponentially and the value is realized when the team is sold. Take Red for example. He bought the team for about 250 million in 1998 and sold it 7 years later in 2005 for 600 million. Some quick math says that he made 350 million dollars in 7 years of ownership or 50 million dollars per year in increased value. AND that was WITHOUT a new stadium.

    Now, I don't know about you, but if I could clear 50 million dollars a year on an investment I would have a hard time calling it a bad one. ( Unless, I guess, I could get the taxpayers to give me 30 million more per year on top of that)

    Edit.

    And if he wants to make more money, then maybe he could look at bringing in a head coach who can take the talent he has and make the team perform better and put in an offense that is fun to watch so people actually want to pay to see them.The NFL is more entertainment than sport and if your product is not entertaining there will be fewer people buying into it.

  5. #25
    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
    8,278

    Re: The economy and two money-losing teams

    "UffDaVikes" wrote:
    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    [quote author=VikingMike link=topic=50354.msg902238#msg902238 date=1233170426]
    [quote author=marstc09 link=topic=50354.msg902237#msg902237 date=1233170054]
    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.
    I have no problem with people making money. Make a trillion dollars if you want, I don't care. But when you want to tax me to make your next hundred million I have a problem with it.
    And if he wanted to I'm sure he could easily fill his swimming pool with money and swim in it. This is what 900 million dollars would look like.
    [img width=450 height=365]http://87billion.com/seven.jpg[/img]
    http://87billion.com/
    [/quote]

    It may look on paper like he is losing money but the value of franchises has been rising exponentially and the value is realized when the team is sold. Take Red for example. He bought the team for about 250 million in 1998 and sold it 7 years later in 2005 for 600 million. Some quick math says that he made 350 million dollars in 7 years of ownership or 50 million dollars per year in increased value. AND that was WITHOUT a new stadium.

    Now, I don't know about you, but if I could clear 50 million dollars a year on an investment I would have a hard time calling it a bad one. ( Unless, I guess, I could get the taxpayers to give me 30 million more per year on top of that)

    Edit.

    And if he wants to make more money, then maybe he could look at bringing in a head coach who can take the talent he has and make the team perform better and put in an offense that is fun to watch so people actually want to pay to see them.The NFL is more entertainment than sport and if your product is not entertaining there will be fewer people buying into it.
    [/quote]
    +1.
    I didn't expect that from you, you just moved very close to the top of the old spreadsheet.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,232

    Re: The economy and two money-losing teams

    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    "UffDaVikes" wrote:
    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    [quote author=NodakPaul link=topic=50354.msg902248#msg902248 date=1233174085]
    [quote author=VikingMike link=topic=50354.msg902238#msg902238 date=1233170426]
    [quote author=marstc09 link=topic=50354.msg902237#msg902237 date=1233170054]
    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.
    I have no problem with people making money. Make a trillion dollars if you want, I don't care. But when you want to tax me to make your next hundred million I have a problem with it.
    And if he wanted to I'm sure he could easily fill his swimming pool with money and swim in it. This is what 900 million dollars would look like.
    [img width=450 height=365]http://87billion.com/seven.jpg[/img]
    http://87billion.com/
    [/quote]

    It may look on paper like he is losing money but the value of franchises has been rising exponentially and the value is realized when the team is sold. Take Red for example. He bought the team for about 250 million in 1998 and sold it 7 years later in 2005 for 600 million. Some quick math says that he made 350 million dollars in 7 years of ownership or 50 million dollars per year in increased value. AND that was WITHOUT a new stadium.

    Now, I don't know about you, but if I could clear 50 million dollars a year on an investment I would have a hard time calling it a bad one. ( Unless, I guess, I could get the taxpayers to give me 30 million more per year on top of that)

    Edit.

    And if he wants to make more money, then maybe he could look at bringing in a head coach who can take the talent he has and make the team perform better and put in an offense that is fun to watch so people actually want to pay to see them.The NFL is more entertainment than sport and if your product is not entertaining there will be fewer people buying into it.
    [/quote]
    +1.
    I didn't expect that from you, you just moved very close to the top of the old spreadsheet.
    [/quote]



    haha


    he's making money hand over fist. [size=10pt]IF HE SELLS THE TEAM[/size]

    i would vote yes in a second to bring the vikings closer to home. and if most minnesota residence think like you , the vikings will be on their way. if you dont want to pay extra than you had better not complain when the vikings pack up and move.

    you don't realize how lucky you are

    http://justlube.net/?page_id=44

  7. #27
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,266

    Re: The economy and two money-losing teams

    "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.
    And how much more would it increase if he moves the team to a better market?

    "If at first you don't succeed, parachuting is not for you"

  8. #28
    vikinggreg's Avatar
    vikinggreg is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Great White North
    Posts
    4,772

    Re: The economy and two money-losing teams

    "singersp" 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.
    And how much more would it increase if he moves the team to a better market?
    It might make it to 40% if the team sold at the value of 839 didn't have a debt value of 38 mil, if they could start operating in the black and get rid of that debt they would be closer to 40%

  9. #29
    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
    8,278

    Re: The economy and two money-losing teams

    "fourdoorchevelle" wrote:
    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    "UffDaVikes" wrote:
    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    [quote author=jmcdon00 link=topic=50354.msg902271#msg902271 date=1233175840]
    [quote author=NodakPaul link=topic=50354.msg902248#msg902248 date=1233174085]
    [quote author=VikingMike link=topic=50354.msg902238#msg902238 date=1233170426]
    [quote author=marstc09 link=topic=50354.msg902237#msg902237 date=1233170054]
    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.
    I have no problem with people making money. Make a trillion dollars if you want, I don't care. But when you want to tax me to make your next hundred million I have a problem with it.
    And if he wanted to I'm sure he could easily fill his swimming pool with money and swim in it. This is what 900 million dollars would look like.
    [img width=450 height=365]http://87billion.com/seven.jpg[/img]
    http://87billion.com/
    [/quote]

    It may look on paper like he is losing money but the value of franchises has been rising exponentially and the value is realized when the team is sold. Take Red for example. He bought the team for about 250 million in 1998 and sold it 7 years later in 2005 for 600 million. Some quick math says that he made 350 million dollars in 7 years of ownership or 50 million dollars per year in increased value. AND that was WITHOUT a new stadium.

    Now, I don't know about you, but if I could clear 50 million dollars a year on an investment I would have a hard time calling it a bad one. ( Unless, I guess, I could get the taxpayers to give me 30 million more per year on top of that)

    Edit.

    And if he wants to make more money, then maybe he could look at bringing in a head coach who can take the talent he has and make the team perform better and put in an offense that is fun to watch so people actually want to pay to see them.The NFL is more entertainment than sport and if your product is not entertaining there will be fewer people buying into it.
    [/quote]
    +1.
    I didn't expect that from you, you just moved very close to the top of the old spreadsheet.
    [/quote]



    haha


    he's making money hand over fist. [size=10pt]IF HE SELLS THE TEAM[/size]

    i would vote yes in a second to bring the vikings closer to home. and if most minnesota residence think like you , the vikings will be on their way. if you dont want to pay extra than you had better not complain when the vikings pack up and move.

    you don't realize how lucky you are
    [/quote]
    Same with Bill Gates. He only makes money if he sells the stock he owns(okay I don't know if microsoft pays dividends or not but many large companies don't). Many businesses reinvest their profits and only make big money when they sell. Zygi understands these things and that is why he bought the team, he knew that he wouldn't have much of an annual profit, but he wanted to own that asset because he believed it would appreciate over time. He may have speculated that he would be able to get a new stadium, but that is just speculation, no different than picking up a few shares of stock, or buying a house in an area you think will be redeveoped.

    It's been stated that the dome lease is one of the worst in the NFL, but since it is going to expire soon couldn't that be reworked in order to save the Zigster some dough?

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,232

    Re: The economy and two money-losing teams

    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    "fourdoorchevelle" wrote:
    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    "UffDaVikes" wrote:
    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    [quote author=NodakPaul link=topic=50354.msg902274#msg902274 date=1233177410]
    [quote author=jmcdon00 link=topic=50354.msg902271#msg902271 date=1233175840]
    [quote author=NodakPaul link=topic=50354.msg902248#msg902248 date=1233174085]
    [quote author=VikingMike link=topic=50354.msg902238#msg902238 date=1233170426]
    [quote author=marstc09 link=topic=50354.msg902237#msg902237 date=1233170054]
    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.
    I have no problem with people making money. Make a trillion dollars if you want, I don't care. But when you want to tax me to make your next hundred million I have a problem with it.
    And if he wanted to I'm sure he could easily fill his swimming pool with money and swim in it. This is what 900 million dollars would look like.
    [img width=450 height=365]http://87billion.com/seven.jpg[/img]
    http://87billion.com/
    [/quote]

    It may look on paper like he is losing money but the value of franchises has been rising exponentially and the value is realized when the team is sold. Take Red for example. He bought the team for about 250 million in 1998 and sold it 7 years later in 2005 for 600 million. Some quick math says that he made 350 million dollars in 7 years of ownership or 50 million dollars per year in increased value. AND that was WITHOUT a new stadium.

    Now, I don't know about you, but if I could clear 50 million dollars a year on an investment I would have a hard time calling it a bad one. ( Unless, I guess, I could get the taxpayers to give me 30 million more per year on top of that)

    Edit.

    And if he wants to make more money, then maybe he could look at bringing in a head coach who can take the talent he has and make the team perform better and put in an offense that is fun to watch so people actually want to pay to see them.The NFL is more entertainment than sport and if your product is not entertaining there will be fewer people buying into it.
    [/quote]
    +1.
    I didn't expect that from you, you just moved very close to the top of the old spreadsheet.
    [/quote]



    haha


    he's making money hand over fist. [size=10pt]IF HE SELLS THE TEAM[/size]

    i would vote yes in a second to bring the vikings closer to home. and if most minnesota residence think like you , the vikings will be on their way. if you dont want to pay extra than you had better not complain when the vikings pack up and move.

    you don't realize how lucky you are
    [/quote]
    Same with Bill Gates. He only makes money if he sells the stock he owns(okay I don't know if microsoft pays dividends or not but many large companies don't). Many businesses reinvest their profits and only make big money when they sell. Zygi understands these things and that is why he bought the team, he knew that he wouldn't have much of an annual profit, but he wanted to own that asset because he believed it would appreciate over time. He may have speculated that he would be able to get a new stadium, but that is just speculation, no different than picking up a few shares of stock, or buying a house in an area you think will be redeveoped.

    It's been stated that the dome lease is one of the worst in the NFL, but since it is going to expire soon couldn't that be reworked in order to save the Zigster some dough?
    [/quote]

    why would he keep this stadium , when a more profitable stadium is already approved?

    http://justlube.net/?page_id=44

Page 3 of 23 FirstFirst 1234513 ... 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
  •