None of those things add up to anywhere near $20 million. Unless MLSE chooses to take a huge bath on the team. Which they have to be. The only hope for ROI has to be ever rising expansion fees. That cannot be a sustainable business model. The Argos generate 5X the tv viewership but pay players $5,000,000 combined. If the Argos are losing MLSE $5m per year how much are TFC losing them?Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleBlue_Red
According to Forbes, TFC loses about $9 million
https://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissm.../#6ac68d8b199c
And that's with MLSE using the Leafs to sell TFC corporate sponsorship and tickets (about $21 million according to Rick Westhead a couple of years ago). Imagine what the Argonauts could do if Rogers bought into them, and the Argonauts were a part of MLSE.
https://i.imgur.com/eBnNgXf.pngQuote:
Originally Posted by R.J
Is there a reason why you felt the need to post something I just posted rdavies ?
Imagine no longer. Are you clairvoyant or did you have inside information? LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by R.J
I thought it would happen eventually, but not this soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by Golden Fleece
Not sure how many here would care, but I've heard that MLSE has been in talks with Jamie Dawick about the Rock for a little while now. Initiated by Dawick from my understanding.
One could tolerate $9 million loss if you share in expansion fees for the new teams. The two new teams are putting up $150 million. That fee continues to rise.Quote:
Originally Posted by R.J
They read your post and just had to buy them right away. And voila!Quote:
Originally Posted by R.J
It was a thrill to see TFC join the Argos as champions of their league. The team has rewarded its loyal and numerous fans with this championship.
It has been a pleasure seeing the success of the league and TFC in particular. However, there are still many challenges facing MLS before it can be acclaimed as an unmitigated success:
. The majority of the clubs are still losing money (TFC supposedly lost 9 M)
. There is no salary cap, allowing rich clubs to buy success on the field.(even the mighty NFL has a salary cap for the sake of parity)
. The danger of charter clubs being abandoned in the chase for profit
. Disappointing TV ratings-only 1.14 m USA viewers for the championship game(drop of 43%). A drop from 1.5 m to 1.3 m in Canada. When compared to Super Bowl and Grey Cup, it shows a general disinterest in the most important soccer game of the year. Some will point to extenuating circumstances for the poor numbers but the numbers are so dismal, the league must be concerned. When a regular league game in a foreign country(UK's Premier league) can have more U.S. viewers than their own championship, it's got to be worrying.
.What some see as the inflated price to enter the league. If this major source of revenue goes bust, the league could be in serious trouble.
Soccer is a wonderful game but if the above issues are not addressed, it is possible, we could see the whole thing collapse like a house of cards. I enjoy watching the occasional soccer game but must admit I'm a fervent fan of the CFL, so hopefully I'm not being too biased in my concerns about the MLS.
.
He was probably just posting the picture from your link, so people could immediately see it. Why are you always so pissy? Always posting ??? and huh?? Just relax dude. Lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by R.J
This is why the franchise values are so high. People putting up the money for the franchises are obviously betting on soccer. They may be right, but I really don't see it, at least the way they do. I do agree that soccer will continue to rise in popularity, mainly due to immigration, and changing demographics, but I think they are getting ahead of themselves, and basically turning the MLS into a pyramid scheme. They promised not to follow the old NASL scheme of rapid expansion, but they let that slip in the search of easy $$$. I don't have a crystal ball, but in my humble opinion I see another implosion of pro soccer in North America if the MLS is not careful. There are many franchises losing money, and a couple of fires in certain cities. I will only say that MLS needs to be very careful unless they want to end up in the very full graveyards of defunct North American soccer leagues. I actually wish them well, but I find that hard to do with certain TFC fan types, but that's a different story.Quote:
Originally Posted by 1971GreyCup
The biggest danger to MLS, is loss of confidence by present owners and potential new investors in the product. As long as everyone involved, retains confidence, that things will continue to get better and values of clubs will continue to climb, then all will be well. If the majority of the clubs continue to lose money and any potential TV revenue looks like it might disappear because of poor television numbers, then there is always the possibility that confidence could wane.
No endeavour can succeed in the long run, if it continues to rely on new investors to keep the books balanced. Eventually, either the endeavour runs out of new investors or lack of confidence it long range profitability, causes potential investors to abandon the idea of getting involved.
As "argos1873" mentioned, NASL eventually collapsed because of over reaching with rapid expansion and mounting debts. MLS would be wise to learn from this example and be more cautious and take a slower approach to future growth. Failure to do so could result in a dot com type crash.
The warnings are on the horizon but hopefully MLS will take a more prudent approach in their business model and avoid a collapse of the league. But as we have seen numerous times in the past, no organization is too big to fail.
Nashville joined the MLS as the 24th franchisee. Another $150m to divide equally amongst the existing franchise. Nice!
The founders of Amway nod their head in approval. But all joking aside, that's 6.8 million per franchise, as I assume that the pending new LA franchise doesn't get a cut of that money. I could be wrong, but if they do then that's 6.5 million. Nothing to scoff at, but TFC still loses 3 million per season if all things remain the same. I can see the board room presentations; the future of sport in North America is soccer, and at $150 million you are getting in on the ground floor. I can't say they are wrong, but I'm not as certain as they are that they are right. But what do I know, I had a chance to buy bitcoin at 10 cents a coin but didn't and later owned 10 coins and sold them for a hefty 700 dollar profit. I wish them all the luck in the world in their ventures.Quote:
Originally Posted by 1971GreyCup
$9 Million loss per Forbes would be in US $ wouldn't it?Quote:
Originally Posted by R.J
Nashville and Sacramento just granted MLS franchises - more expansion fees - yee haw!
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleBlue_Red
A definite ponzy scheme.
Who gives a rats rectum about the MLS and TFC.
Its a ponzy scheme until it proves itself otherwise, but still, there's people who care about MLS and TFC. People say who cares about the CFL and the Argos. They are aholes. You don't need to be like them. Let them enjoy what they like, while they can.Quote:
Originally Posted by argotom
Wouldn't the easier way of determining a teams value be what someone is willing to pay for it?
The CFL has solid ownership now, but we don't have to go very far back to when that wasn't the case.
That said, the tv ratings for the mls cup have to be a cause for some alarm. All of the points on both sides are valid.
But as fans we all have to move on from the tfc/argos debate.
Both teams won titles this year, both teams are successful, both teams have loyal fans. Just because a small group of hooligans hung a banner on an overpass, is no reason to wish for a franchise/league to fold
Why is the fee $150 million? And why are people paying it? To lose money and have low tv audience. Je ne comprends pas.