Hopefully Big Cat will work the Southern Charm

[Outshined 11]

I am having trouble finding a link to this , but there are some more not mentioned, such as the Falcons have the lowest revenue and the Packers are considered a "high Revenue" team.

 

1356572[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I read an article where that info is not released. Media and other people just speculate.

[PantherDave 0]

Where the Hell is Vet????

[PantherDave 0]

I read an article where that info is not released. Media and other people just speculate.

 

1356584[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

Now, that I doubt very seriously.

[CaptainHook 891]

Now, that I doubt very seriously.

 

1356588[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Actually I think he's right. NFL owners are very hush hush about total revenues. They don't want the NFLPA having that kind of info.

[Outshined 11]

NFL Players Association Executive Director Gene Upshaw warned owners in Detroit last October that eight franchises were gaining an unfair competitive advantage because of their revenue growth. He said the union intended to make revenue sharing a major issue in negotiations over a new labor agreement. Although Upshaw did not name the teams, they are widely assumed to be the Redskins, Cowboys, Texans, Patriots, Philadelphia Eagles, Denver Broncos, Cleveland Browns and Chicago Bears.

 

 

Assuming - speculating, same thing....

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A...anguage=printer

[PantherDave 0]

Assuming - speculating, same thing....

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A...anguage=printer

 

1356594[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

Very interesting, then it's all basically smoke and mirrors, and they all make a fuggin killing, so sign the fuggin agreement already!!!!!!

[Skippy 5]

The Steelers are pretty bare bones in their advertising, I saw one ad..Coldwell Banker.  They are the SUPER BOWL CHAMPS!!

 

It's a mindset to maximize revenues, and your face(internet web site) to the fans should be a high priority.  For the most past, by just glancing at team websites you tell the haves from the have nots.

 

1356388[/snapback]

 

 

 

While I am certain that the Steelers fall into the "have not" group, I'm not so sure you can use something like that as a measuring stick. What I mean is that the Steelers don't always push for making the most money that they can. They sold the naming rights to Heinz Field for much less then the could have if they wanted it to be a dot com field or something like that just because they wanted it to stay with a local company. They sold personal seat licenses for a fraction of what they could have. They consistently keep their ticket prices lower than most if not all the NFL.

[Cordo 29]

NFL Team Revenues ($ mil, for 2004 season, the last season available):

 

Link from Forbes magazine

 

1. Washington Redskins 287

 

2. New England Patriots 236

 

3. Dallas Cowboys 231

 

4. Philadelphia Eagles 216

 

5. Houston Texans 215

 

6. Cleveland Browns 203

 

7. Denver Broncos 202

 

8. Carolina Panthers 195

 

9. Tampa Bay Buccaneers 195

 

10. Chicago Bears 193

 

11. Baltimore Ravens 192

 

12. Miami Dolphins 190

 

13. Green Bay Packers 189

 

14. Tennessee Titans 186

 

15. Detroit Lions 186

 

16. Seattle Seahawks 183

 

17. Pittsburgh Steelers 182

 

18. Kansas City Chiefs 181

 

19. St. Louis Rams 176

 

20. New York Giants 175

 

21. New Orleans Saints 175

 

22. Buffalo Bills 173

 

23. New York Jets 172

 

24. Cincinnati Bengals 171

 

25. San Francisco 49ers 171

 

26. Jacksonville Jaguars 169

 

27. Oakland Raiders 169

 

28. Atlanta Falcons 168

 

29. Indianapolis Colts 166

 

30. San Diego Chargers 165

 

31. Minnesota Vikings 164

 

32. Arizona Cardinals 153

Edited March 8, 2006 by Cordo

[TripleW64 12]

Personally surprised to see

 

6. Cleveland Browns (lower)

11. Baltimore Ravens (lower)

14. Tennessee Titans (lower)

15. Detroit Lions (lower)

25. San Francisco 49ers (Higher)

27. Raiders (higher)

 

It seems kinda upside for those teams.

[mggoilers 0]

While I am certain that the Steelers fall into the "have not" group, I'm not so sure you can use something like that as a measuring stick.  What I mean is that the Steelers don't always push for making the most money that they can.  They sold the naming rights to Heinz Field for much less then the could have if they wanted it to be a dot com field or something like that just because they wanted it to stay with a local company.  They sold personal seat licenses for a fraction of what they could have.  They consistently keep their ticket prices lower than most if not all the NFL.

 

1356775[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

So because Pittsburgh ( and other lower revenue franchises) want to keep it real....real cheap. I'm forced to spend more money in Dallas/Houston(other higher revenue places) for tickets and parking. Then to top it off, that money gets sent to Pittsburgh ( and other lower revenue franchises)...seems fair.

 

I'm sure the lower revenue teams are fully aware or can be made aware of how to maximize revenue streams...I'd be interested to if these types of initiatives become part of the new agreement.

[CaptainHook 891]

NFL Team Revenues ($ mil, for 2004 season, the last season available):

 

Link from Forbes magazine

 

1. Washington Redskins 287

 

2. New England Patriots 236

 

3. Dallas Cowboys 231

 

4. Philadelphia Eagles 216

 

5. Houston Texans 215

 

6. Cleveland Browns 203

 

7. Denver Broncos 202

 

8. Carolina Panthers 195

 

9. Tampa Bay Buccaneers 195

 

10. Chicago Bears 193

 

11. Baltimore Ravens 192

 

12. Miami Dolphins 190

 

13. Green Bay Packers 189

 

14. Tennessee Titans 186

 

15. Detroit Lions 186

 

16. Seattle Seahawks 183

 

17. Pittsburgh Steelers 182

 

18. Kansas City Chiefs 181

 

19. St. Louis Rams 176

 

20. New York Giants 175

 

21. New Orleans Saints 175

 

22. Buffalo Bills 173

 

23. New York Jets 172

 

24. Cincinnati Bengals 171

 

25. San Francisco 49ers 171

 

26. Jacksonville Jaguars 169

 

27. Oakland Raiders 169

 

28. Atlanta Falcons 168

 

29. Indianapolis Colts 166

 

30. San Diego Chargers 165

 

31. Minnesota Vikings 164

 

32. Arizona Cardinals 153

 

1356790[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Nice job. Thanks. Carolina is in the top 9. Certainly higher than I thought, but still over $90 million behind first place.

 

That top 5 is where you want to be. Only a $50 million difference between #6 and #32.

Edited March 8, 2006 by CaptainHook

[pedroz13 0]

I am having trouble finding a link to this , but there are some more not mentioned, such as the Falcons have the lowest revenue and the Packers are considered a "high Revenue" team.

 

1356572[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Maybe they shouldn't have given Worthless Vick (sorry, I mean 'Michael' Vick) a 130 million dollar contract or whatever. Maybe then they could still be in the middle of the pack. He does sell spamshirts though.....I'll give him that.

[Cordo 29]

While I am certain that the Steelers fall into the "have not" group, I'm not so sure you can use something like that as a measuring stick.  What I mean is that the Steelers don't always push for making the most money that they can.  They sold the naming rights to Heinz Field for much less then the could have if they wanted it to be a dot com field or something like that just because they wanted it to stay with a local company.  They sold personal seat licenses for a fraction of what they could have. They consistently keep their ticket prices lower than most if not all the NFL.

 

1356775[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I was going to respond to this last night when I posted the revenue list, but was too tired.

 

Over the past few years, I've done a HUGH amount of research on NFL labor issues, finances, salary cap, etc. In the course of that, PSL's are one thing I've become pretty familiar with. I think there is a misconception on how they work and how the money derived from them is used.

 

As most people know, Carolina was the first NFL team to make use of the PSL. They raised around $150 mil with their initial sale of PSLs. Alot of money -- and they could use it however they wanted to, but they also ended up with a tax bill of close to $55 mil (standard corporate tax rate of 35%). going from memory on these numbers, they may be off some, but you get the idea

 

League and individual team tax experts saw this and got smart. Now practically all PSL arrangements are set up so that the money is collected through a public entity -- teams don't collect the money and thus, they don't pay taxes on it. Of course, there are also significant limitations on how the PSL money can be used due to this arrangement, but typically it's a pretty broad area (stadium construction, renovations, and the like). The key here is, these deals are set up so that they are capped, and excess PSL monies are targeted for specific things, and beyond that, proceeds must be refunded to the PSL purchasers.

 

The point here is -- don't kid yourself into thinking the Steelers were doing something out of their own good graces by "selling PSLs at a fraction of what they could have". Ticket prices and naming rights ? I'll take your word on that.

 

Of course we all like to view our teams in the best of light, but reality is that this is business first and foremost for the owners, and alot of average fans are slowly being squeezed out of buying NFL tickets. They aren't leaving money on the table in very many cases.

[CaptainHook 891]

No PSL's for the Colts new stadium. . .

[PSULions 1]

I believe that the Panthers are in the 8 - 12 range as far as NFL teams.

 

1) I am pretty certain that the Panthers own their stadium as it was financed by more than 62,000 PSLs to built the place back in 1996.

 

2) If PSL owners don't pay for their season tickets and / or playoff tickets they lose their seats and the ownership of the seats revert back to the team. This happens on a regular basis. I bought my 2 seats back in the fall directly from the team, so they got $4,000 of my money at no cost to them.

 

3) The Panthers collect $300 transfer fee for every set of seats transferred by the current owner to a new owner. This can also add more $$ to the team's revenue bucket.

 

4) The Panthers just signed a new naming rights contract with Bank of America (also my employer) for some serious $$$ further adding to their coffers.

 

5) The Stadium has about 60 plus luxury suites that are leased for some big bucks to local companies (BoA, Wachovia, Duke Engery and several others).

 

6) They also have several minor sponsors, like Dodge, Pepsi, Bojangles, etc. that the Bank gets money from.

 

So, to answer PD's question they are most definitely a higher revenue team.

Edited March 10, 2006 by PSULions