Sabres' value and revenue

[LGR4GM]

Buffalo is reportedly worth 1.36 billion. That's 29th in the league. They also managed to generate 174-183 million in revenue last yr which is shocking considering how awful they've become and how run down the arena is. 

"next six lowest revenue-generating clubs — Buffalo, Utah, Ottawa, San Jose, Anaheim and Winnipeg — still made between $174 million and $183 million last season."

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6680260/2025/10/01/nhl-franchise-valuations-team-worth-sportico/

[tom webster]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

Buffalo is reportedly worth 1.36 billion. That's 29th in the league. They also managed to generate 174-183 million in revenue last yr which is shocking considering how awful they've become and how run down the arena is. 

"next six lowest revenue-generating clubs — Buffalo, Utah, Ottawa, San Jose, Anaheim and Winnipeg — still made between $174 million and $183 million last season."

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6680260/2025/10/01/nhl-franchise-valuations-team-worth-sportico/

It’s only shocking if people have believed the long held myth that these franchises lose money. 

[PromoTheRobot]

1 hour ago, tom webster said:

It’s only shocking if people have believed the long held myth that these franchises lose money. 

There is a difference between franchise values and operating in the red. Does $180MM/yr pay the bills? I don't know all the Sabres expenses.

Edited 2 hours ago by PromoTheRobot

[shrader]

Without Winnipeg, that's a whole lot of playoff drought on that lowest revenue list (I know, Ottawa).  That whole thing feels like a big chicken or the egg thing on what is coming first.  I'll hold off on Utah for now because who the hell knows what they have there yet.

[LGR4GM]

29 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

The is a difference between franchise values and operating in the red. Does $180MM/yr pay the bills? I don't know all the Sabres expenses.

Does 180 million pay all the bills for a team that only spends half that on the cap? I'd hope so. 

[JohnC]

12 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Does 180 million pay all the bills for a team that only spends half that on the cap? I'd hope so. 

Are the Sabres in the red or black when the revenues/costs are tabulated?

Just my opinion, but if the owner had a competitive team that made the playoffs, the generated revenue would be around 50% more. Save a penny and lose a dollar.

[Big Guava]

58 minutes ago, tom webster said:

It’s only shocking if people have believed the long held myth that these franchises lose money. 

Making small amounts of money by pinching every penny possible like many NHL teams do versus making crap loads of money while spending money like it's free as they do in the NFL are completely different things.

Also "revenue" is not profit.

Edited 2 hours ago by Big Guava

[PromoTheRobot]

42 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Does 180 million pay all the bills for a team that only spends half that on the cap? I'd hope so. 

I don't know. What other expenses are there? Teams have more employees than just players. What about rent, taxes, insurance? Are you aware that a salary is only about 60% of the cost of an employee?

Edited 2 hours ago by PromoTheRobot

[LGR4GM]

4 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

I don't know. What other expenses are there? Teams have more employees than just players.

Yea I'm sure Jan in accounting is really making it hard for Terry to afford her 60k a year. 

Also as noted up thread, Terry is saving a penny to cost himself a dollar. This team would make far more money if they made the playoffs. 

Edited 1 hour ago by LGR4GM

[tom webster]

Thanks to everyone that is explaining the difference between revenue and profit. You all must work for the government or an accounting firm because I can’t imagine anyone else cares about profit.

You all need to look up an old WKRP episode where Doctor Johnny Fever explained the myth of profit.

These guys are all making money. Very rich, very smart people are doing something normally foreign to them; they are begging for inclusion. They wouldn’t be doing that for the privilege of losing money.

[PASabreFan]

3 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Buffalo is reportedly worth 1.36 billion. That's 29th in the league. They also managed to generate 174-183 million in revenue last yr which is shocking considering how awful they've become and how run down the arena is. 

"next six lowest revenue-generating clubs — Buffalo, Utah, Ottawa, San Jose, Anaheim and Winnipeg — still made between $174 million and $183 million last season."

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6680260/2025/10/01/nhl-franchise-valuations-team-worth-sportico/

I'm hung up on the word made. Made implies profit to me. I think it refers to revenues tho.

[K-9]

1 hour ago, PromoTheRobot said:

I don't know. What other expenses are there? Teams have more employees than just players. What about rent, taxes, insurance? Are you aware that a salary is only about 60% of the cost of an employee?

Good point. Many times I tried to point this out to people over at TSW, but they just didn’t want to hear it. It was all “Ralph is cheap.” Bottom line is this: if one team’s operating costs represent X percentage of revenues and another team’s operating costs represent 2X in player costs that team is at a competitive disadvantage. The example I would point to is that the Cowboys were spending 35% of revenues on those costs while the Bills were spending 65%. A common push back would be “but all the salaries are paid for by TV revenues” but as you point out, salaries are only one component of operating costs. 

[JohnC]

3 minutes ago, K-9 said:

Good point. Many times I tried to point this out to people over at TSW, but they just didn’t want to hear it. It was all “Ralph is cheap.” Bottom line is this: if one team’s operating costs represent X percentage of revenues and another team’s operating costs represent 2X in player costs that team is at a competitive disadvantage. The example I would point to is that the Cowboys were spending 35% of revenues on those costs while the Bills were spending 65%. A common push back would be “but all the salaries are paid for by TV revenues” but as you point out, salaries are only one component of operating costs. 

The most impactful thing that the franchise/owner can do to increase revenue is to have a consistently competitive team. And I’m sure you aware that being in the playoffs increases revenue and profit margin.

What’s sad to see are the empty seats in the arena at the home games. What’s even more discouraging is that it is not unusual to see a sold seat end up being a vacant seat. That’s a loss of in-house revenue.
 

As you noted, there is no question that because of the astounding amount of tv money shared by all teams in football that hockey will never have the ability to generate such an amount of money. But it’s indisputable that this lagging franchise has lost a lot of potential revenue due to its own systemic ineptitude. 

[K-9]

13 minutes ago, JohnC said:

The most impactful thing that the franchise/owner can do to increase revenue is to have a consistently competitive team. And I’m sure you aware that being in the playoffs increases revenue and profit margin.

What’s sad to see are the empty seats in the arena at the home games. What’s even more discouraging is that it is not unusual to see a sold seat end up being a vacant seat. That’s a loss of in-house revenue.
 

As you noted, there is no question that because of the astounding amount of tv money shared by all teams in football that hockey will never have the ability to generate such an amount of money. But it’s indisputable that this lagging franchise has lost a lot of potential revenue due to its own systemic ineptitude. 

I appreciate what you’re saying, but my point had nothing to do with the obvious ineptitude of Pegula and how much revenue he’s earning or losing. I was merely underscoring @PromoTheRobot’s point that player salaries are only one component of player and other franchise operating costs and how disparities between what percentage of revenues teams spend on those costs can create competitive advantages/disadvantages. 

[Thorny]

Agree, relatively speaking our playoff drought is actually shorter than other teams - when you factor in revenue, that we are in no way responsible for, it becomes clear that the competitive disadvantage foisted upon us leaves us in an indisputable “what could the sabres have even done?” situation