LabattBlue Posted November 29, 2006 Report Share Posted November 29, 2006 Excerpt from a great article in the Buffalo News... They announced a profit of $4.5 million last season, which they said includes their take in revenue sharing (others within the league questioned how they could announce that total in the spring when their revenue sharing numbers weren't finalized until the fall). Hmmm... One other interesting note... The Sabres Store inside HSBC Arena looks like Christmastime every day, with lines at the cash registers and customers trying on the newly designed jerseys. As per the collective bargaining agreement, the Sabres get all the revenue from merchandise sales inside their arena. The sales numbers almost defy belief. Arena employees say the Sabres have collected as much as $100,000 on game days and between $20,000 and $40,000 on days when there's no game. :o :o http://buffalonews.com/editorial/20061128/2033898.asp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cgang Posted November 29, 2006 Report Share Posted November 29, 2006 I believe the bit about store sales. I went to the Montreal game and it was hard even getting in to the HSBC store. It was a mob scene so I figured I would just go online, which was a mistake. I think the selection at the store is much better. I'll have to go there on an off day when there isn't a game (tough for me, though, since I live in DC). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Christopher Posted November 29, 2006 Report Share Posted November 29, 2006 My dad sometimes walks by there on his lunch break and he says it usually is loaded with people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted November 29, 2006 Author Report Share Posted November 29, 2006 I believe the bit about store sales. I went to the Montreal game and it was hard even getting in to the HSBC store. It was a mob scene so I figured I would just go online, which was a mistake. I think the selection at the store is much better. I'll have to go there on an off day when there isn't a game (tough for me, though, since I live in DC). The store sales isn't what I don't believe. Like I stated in my post title, it's the "bottom line" that is not always believable. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BetweenThePipes00 Posted November 29, 2006 Report Share Posted November 29, 2006 I really don't care what they say about the bottom line as long as they are making an honest effort to put a good product on the ice. If they do that, God bless them, let them make whatever they can, and I don't need to know. This season is a total freak occurance with the new jersey and the team being so good ... it's the perfect storm. No way they do this kind of business next season and the year after at the Sabres store. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orange Seats Posted November 29, 2006 Report Share Posted November 29, 2006 No way they do this kind of business next season and the year after at the Sabres store. thats when they start releasing third jerseys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted November 29, 2006 Author Report Share Posted November 29, 2006 I really don't care what they say about the bottom line as long as they are making an honest effort to put a good product on the ice. If they do that, God bless them, let them make whatever they can, and I don't need to know. This season is a total freak occurance with the new jersey and the team being so good ... it's the perfect storm. No way they do this kind of business next season and the year after at the Sabres store. My only problem with it, is if they use the bottom line to justify an increase in ticket prices when the bottom line was conjured up using fuzzy math. <_< Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BetweenThePipes00 Posted November 29, 2006 Report Share Posted November 29, 2006 The market will always set ticket prices. The prices are going to go up because the demand is greater for them ... that's life in America. Businesses sell things for whatever they can get for them, and pro sports teams are no different. If that means Tommy G make more money next season, good for him. He took a bath for a couple years. And yeah, I know, he doesn't need the money, but he stuck his neck out when no one else would. Besides, it is not a non-profit organization. If the players can make millions I am OK with the owner making money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saber61 Posted November 29, 2006 Report Share Posted November 29, 2006 The market will always set ticket prices. The prices are going to go up because the demand is greater for them ... that's life in America. Businesses sell things for whatever they can get for them, and pro sports teams are no different. If that means Tommy G make more money next season, good for him. He took a bath for a couple years. And yeah, I know, he doesn't need the money, but he stuck his neck out when no one else would. Besides, it is not a non-profit organization. If the players can make millions I am OK with the owner making money. agreed the guy did bail us out and took a few years of losing to finally be able to have a winning contender... as long as the team is winning he can make all the money he wants... if team performance is sacrificed for profit.... thats when i get upset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two or less Posted November 30, 2006 Report Share Posted November 30, 2006 Great point. When the article came out that the Sabres can barly survive in current NHL, me and many others questioned it. Sabres said they made $4 million or so profit last season, and that doesn't include the $6 million revenue sharing, though they say it might, theres no way it does. Last year we had 18 sell outs. This year, 41 sell outs, more merchadice sales, ads going for more money and new MSG deal.... even if we gain like $3 million from revenue sharing, we'll be floating in money my guess is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BetweenThePipes00 Posted November 30, 2006 Report Share Posted November 30, 2006 Why is everyone so fast to believe numbers thrown around by the media when a team is supposedly making money, but if the team says it is losing money it is always assumed it's not really that bad? This team will NEVER be "floating in money," not as long as they are spending near the cap limit on players. Payroll went up at least $10 million, and it is going up again next season because all those guys who signed multi year deals have raises built in, and Drury and Briere and Vanek and Roy are all in the last year of their deals. This year's actual payroll might be under the team's cap number (around $41 million), but that means eventually the actual payroll will go OVER the cap number as guys get further into their contracts. I'm not trying to be all gloom and doom and scare people into thinking the team might move someday, it's not that. But I can see it now, when they raise ticket prices for the first time in years next season everyone is going to flip out and complain because they are supposedly "floating in money." It's just not true. Most seasons they are going to be very happy just to make a small profit. And even with all this feel-good stuff going on now, God forbid this team gets upset early in the playoffs, all of a sudden that's a TON of money they won't have. They can't base their business on 10 or more home playoff games every year. A deep playoff run has to be looked at as a bonus. If they start counting on that money it will bite them in the ass. Again, I am not crying for Tommy G., just saying let's not go overboard and assume prices should never go up and he is a greedy bastard when they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted November 30, 2006 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2006 Why is everyone so fast to believe numbers thrown around by the media when a team is supposedly making money, but if the team says it is losing money it is always assumed it's not really that bad? This team will NEVER be "floating in money," not as long as they are spending near the cap limit on players. Payroll went up at least $10 million, and it is going up again next season because all those guys who signed multi year deals have raises built in, and Drury and Briere and Vanek and Roy are all in the last year of their deals. This year's actual payroll might be under the team's cap number (around $41 million), but that means eventually the actual payroll will go OVER the cap number as guys get further into their contracts. I'm not trying to be all gloom and doom and scare people into thinking the team might move someday, it's not that. But I can see it now, when they raise ticket prices for the first time in years next season everyone is going to flip out and complain because they are supposedly "floating in money." It's just not true. Most seasons they are going to be very happy just to make a small profit. And even with all this feel-good stuff going on now, God forbid this team gets upset early in the playoffs, all of a sudden that's a TON of money they won't have. They can't base their business on 10 or more home playoff games every year. A deep playoff run has to be looked at as a bonus. If they start counting on that money it will bite them in the ass. Again, I am not crying for Tommy G., just saying let's not go overboard and assume prices should never go up and he is a greedy bastard when they do. I don't agree that they are "floating in money" nor will I go off the "deep end" if they raise ticket prices next year. I'm just not convinced that they are not manipulating the numbers(fuzzy math) to a certain extent and that this all leads to a convenient reason to say "we lost money, therefore we need to raise ticket prices". Let's say TG gives himself a 2 million dollar salary to be the head of the Sabres. Does this get applied to the bottom line? If so, that is what I would call fudging the numbers. PS Darcy is going to really start earning his salary next off-season. This year was easy for the most part as he was able to keep the team intact for the most part. Let's see what happens when Briere & Drury show up at his door with $$$ in their eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two or less Posted November 30, 2006 Report Share Posted November 30, 2006 PS Darcy is going to really start earning his salary next off-season. This year was easy for the most part as he was able to keep the team intact for the most part. Let's see what happens when Briere & Drury show up at his door with $$$ in their eyes. The hardest work for Darcy is long gone. He had to re-build a team that was horrid and couldn't score, our PP was one of the worst and he build his team the way he wanted and they've become to the best in the league. We have many prospects in Europe, NCAA and Rochester to say our future is solid. Even if we go thru a bad period of time, it probably won't need as much rebuilding as he had to do couple years ago. Regier is one of the best GMs in the league and we should be greatful for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BetweenThePipes00 Posted November 30, 2006 Report Share Posted November 30, 2006 Let's say TG gives himself a 2 million dollar salary to be the head of the Sabres. Does this get applied to the bottom line? If so, that is what I would call fudging the numbers. You could also call it "Paying himself less than half what some of the players make," which is not all that unreasonable considering what we called "saving the team" he could also call "pouring millions into a black hole for 3 years" ... I'm just sayin' ... you are not wrong, but there are 2 sides to every story, and it seems fans in general are too quick to buy one side and too quick to dismiss the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted November 30, 2006 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2006 The hardest work for Darcy is long gone. He had to re-build a team that was horrid and couldn't score, our PP was one of the worst and he build his team the way he wanted and they've become to the best in the league. We have many prospects in Europe, NCAA and Rochester to say our future is solid. Even if we go thru a bad period of time, it probably won't need as much rebuilding as he had to do couple years ago. Regier is one of the best GMs in the league and we should be greatful for that. We'll agree to disagree. There have been great prospects before that don't amount to jack when they reach the NHL, so it's impossible to say that it's okay when we start losing players off the current roster because we are loaded down on the farm and these young players will step right in and not miss a beat. If you don't believe that the Briere/Drury decision isn't the biggest one Darcy has had to make during his tenure here, you need to open your eyes. These GM's now live and die by the salary cap. One wrong expensive move and all of a sudden, you're hands are tied. Look at how the Connolly signing(because of his unknown status) has handcuffed the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BetweenThePipes00 Posted November 30, 2006 Report Share Posted November 30, 2006 We'll agree to disagree. There have been great prospects before that don't amount to jack when they reach the NHL, so it's impossible to say that it's okay when we start losing players off the current roster because we are loaded down on the farm and these young players will step right in and not miss a beat. If you don't believe that the Briere/Drury decision isn't the biggest one Darcy has had to make during his tenure here, you need to open your eyes. These GM's now live and die by the salary cap. One wrong expensive move and all of a sudden, you're hands are tied. Look at how the Connolly signing(because of his unknown status) has handcuffed the team. I agree ... the Drury/Briere decision is huge ... even finding a way to keep both could be the wrong move, because look at Tampa and how they are handcuffed by just 3 big contracts. Unless the cap goes up way more than anyone expects, he won't be able to keep them both ... or he will and it will cost him Vanek or Miller down the line, and he will get ripped for that. So he will have to settle on one and hope it is the right choice. Before the season, i would have said I want Drury ... now I am leaning more toward Briere ... He has really impressed me this year. But I really like them both, so I don't think we will look back and say "Darcy f'd up, the guy he kept went in the tank!" I don't think either will end up an expensive mistake, but we'll certainly miss whoever leaves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted November 30, 2006 Report Share Posted November 30, 2006 It sounds crazy but I think our most indispensible offensive players are Max and Thomas. As much as I like Briere and Drury, I can see the Sabres living without one and possibly both. I can't see the Sabres letting Vanek get away and max is locked up for a little while. If I were Buffalo, I would offer Vanek a multiyear deal somewhere bewteen 4-5 million and see if he bites. Drury may be affordable if his offensive slide continues, but if Briere continues on his pace he will command 6-7 million for sure and I just don't see the Sabres being able to afford that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.