PDA

View Full Version : FC Dallas....time to relocate?



mighty_torontofc_2008
03-30-2009, 06:17 PM
After the dismal attendance vs Chivas less then 7,000 its time Garber should really think about getting this team relocated to a city that will support a decent franchise..We all know Dallas and Texas support the "other" football strongly and FC Dallas does not look like ever making\
a deep impact in the city...so move it!!

Possible strong football cities where FC Dallas could go:
1) Minnesota...the old NASL Kicks had decent support
2) Montreal/Ottawa..either city could at least double the Dallas support
3) San Diego....that looks more likely as a new home for Chivas USA
4) Tampa Bay...decent soccer market
5) St Louis....this might be the best home for FC Dallas. soccer city usa
6) Detroit...this could bring big thime football to the city...sorry Lions fans
7) New York 2...another good option..

So Mr Garber you have plenty of Options...no one likes to see teams
relocate..bu with FC Dallas...you really do have No choice!!

Lucky Strike
03-30-2009, 06:18 PM
Well they recently fired their tickets promoter or something, so things may improve, but for sure, it's not looking good.

troy1982
03-30-2009, 06:22 PM
You do know that they are profitable, one of the few profitable teams in the league despite there history of low attendance. They are able to remain profitable because of there suburban location which allows for multiple revenue streams from there auxillary facility beside the stadium and other events at PHP. There is no way they are moving.

If you are looking for a team to move it is looking more and more likely that DC United will be moving, My bet is to St. Louis where they wil have stadium funding.

jloome
03-30-2009, 06:29 PM
^^ CCT: One of the few "officially" profitable teams. Sports teams in all genres are notorious for baring unreleased writedowns from parent companies.

That's why, in a year when it allegedly sold more jerseys (250,000) than any other team on Earth, sold out every luxury box and had theleague's highest attendance, the L.A. Galaxy only made $800,000.

Do you really believe TFC is only profitable to the tune of $2.1 million? I'd like to see those line items.

troy1982
03-30-2009, 06:31 PM
^^ CCT: One of the few "officially" profitable teams. Sports teams in all genres are notorious for baring unreleased writedowns from parent companies.

That's why, in a year when it allegedly sold more jerseys (250,000) than any other team on Earth, sold out every luxury box and had theleague's highest attendance, the L.A. Galaxy only made $800,000.

Do you really believe TFC is only profitable to the tune of $2.1 million? I'd like to see those line items.

So Then FC Dallas is probably even more profitable than they are reporting. Which is my point that they are making money for the owner and the league so they aren't going anywhere. DCU on the other hand is lossing alot of money with no SSS in sight so expect them to move.

No team with a SSS built or under construction or playing in a stadium where they get access to other revenue streams are going to move.

That leaves DCU, Chivas and Houston.
Houston is about to start construction and Chivas I think are fine with the HDC, that only leaves DCU.

Having a SSS is more important than many people realize, even if the teams has miserable attendance.

BTW they had ~ 16,000 last week, Dallas isn't a market that does well with home games consecitively

ensco
03-30-2009, 06:50 PM
So Then FC Dallas is probably even more profitable than they are reporting. Which is my point that they are making money for the owner and the league so they aren't going anywhere. DCU on the other hand is lossing alot of money with no SSS in sight so expect them to move.

No team with a SSS built or under construction or playing in a stadium where they get access to other revenue streams are going to move.

That leaves DCU, Chivas and Houston.
Houston is about to start construction and Chivas I think are fine with the HDC, that only leaves DCU.

Having a SSS is more important than many people realize, even if the teams has miserable attendance.

If you have no gate revenues, and you have no TV revenues, then you have no revenues. At least that's what they teach in grade 1.

You're telling me that as some sort of combined real estate play, that by hosting some high school football games that you can charge $1000/game for, or similar, that this somehow changes the overall picture?

You must be joking.

The revenues just are not there.

Clark Hunt inherited a major problem in both Columbus and Dallas. Unlike his father Lamar, Clark has little personal investment in MLS (although he supposedly did play soccer as a kid at SMU). Clark has his plate full with his billion dollar asset, the KC Chiefs, who are an on-field disaster and have major stadium problems (they play in the oldest stadium in the NFL, and get virtually no luxury box revenues).

Columbus and Dallas are major problems for MLS.

ps the idea that DCU would leave that market is even more incredible, but I'm done typing for now....

Dirk Diggler
03-30-2009, 07:10 PM
I want to know who financed Pizza Hut Park ... there is no way that FC Dallas is churning yearly profits significant enough to offset the capital of stadium construction if they put any money towards the project.

troy1982
03-30-2009, 07:15 PM
They owned all the land around the stadium where they have about 17 soccer fields that brings in a boat load of revenue, plus they have many concerts at PHP, and host other events. These revenue streams are very profitable and also FCD to remain profital with low attendance. It's not like they get 6K every week. they average about 13K, 12K is the minimum you need to be profitable in the average SSS. FC Dalls probably needs even less due to all the soccer fields.

As I said in another tread urban stadiums aren't the only business model in this league to turn a profit. TFC has one and FCD has another model and both work.


http://www.eteamz.com/dfeeters93/images/PHPFieldMap.jpg

http://www.pizzahutpark.com/Portals/0/images/park_nolegend5.gif

troy1982
03-30-2009, 07:22 PM
I want to know who financed Pizza Hut Park ... there is no way that FC Dallas is churning yearly profits significant enough to offset the capital of stadium construction if they put any money towards the project.

I believe the country financed the stadium which makes it even more unlikely they will move.

ensco
03-30-2009, 07:44 PM
They owned all the land around the stadium where they have about 17 soccer fields that brings in a boat load of revenue, plus they have many concerts at PHP, and host other events. These revenue streams are very profitable and also FCD to remain profital with low attendance. It's not like they get 6K every week. they average about 13K, 12K is the minimum you need to be profitable in the average SSS. FC Dalls probably needs even less due to all the soccer fields.

As I said in another tread urban stadiums aren't the only business model in this league to turn a profit. TFC has one and FCD has another model and both work.


http://www.pizzahutpark.com/Portals/0/images/park_nolegend5.gif

This is bizarre and illogical. The real estate is separate from the soccer team.

If FC Dallas moved to Antarctica, all those youth fields would continue to have whatever value they have to the soccer-playing community. There is no synergy or linkage.

If you're FC Dallas, you either own the stadium (and pay whatever you negotiated re the cost of capital to acquire or construct it) or you rent it. Whatever the owner of the real estate earns from adjacent youth soccer fields is utterly irrelevant.

It doesn't matter whether it's the same owner of both the team and the field(s). It's two different, separate, separable, businesses.

Phil
03-30-2009, 08:06 PM
It seems to me that this is an opinion thread vs a news thread.

Moved

troy1982
03-30-2009, 08:10 PM
This is bizarre and illogical. The real estate is separate from the soccer team.

If FC Dallas moved to Antarctica, all those youth fields would continue to have whatever value they have to the soccer-playing community. There is no synergy or linkage.

If you're FC Dallas, you either own the stadium (and pay whatever you negotiated re the cost of capital to acquire or construct it) or you rent it. Whatever the owner of the real estate earns from adjacent youth soccer fields is utterly irrelevant.

It doesn't matter whether it's the same owner of both the team and the field(s). It's two different, separate, separable, businesses.

It may seem illogical but that is how the organization is profitable.

Get In There
03-30-2009, 08:17 PM
This is bizarre and illogical. The real estate is separate from the soccer team.

If FC Dallas moved to Antarctica, all those youth fields would continue to have whatever value they have to the soccer-playing community. There is no synergy or linkage.

If you're FC Dallas, you either own the stadium (and pay whatever you negotiated re the cost of capital to acquire or construct it) or you rent it. Whatever the owner of the real estate earns from adjacent youth soccer fields is utterly irrelevant.

It doesn't matter whether it's the same owner of both the team and the field(s). It's two different, separate, separable, businesses.


If it's owned by the same guy its the same business -like MLSE wouldn't count stadium or field rental in the TFC books.

I guy with this much cash is going to see this as his 'soccer' business.

what am I missing

:noidea:

RicoSuave44
03-30-2009, 08:30 PM
They have a SSS, a great derby with Houston, and an expanding market with Latinos and kids. Maybe now they post some poor attendances but this is one market where I think the 'build the fanbase with today's youth players' strategy might payoff 10 years from now.

I say give them some time and they will prove to be one of the league's stronger franchises.

ensco
03-30-2009, 08:45 PM
If it's owned by the same guy its the same business -like MLSE wouldn't count stadium or field rental in the TFC books.

I guy with this much cash is going to see this as his 'soccer' business.

what am I missing

:noidea:

Say you own an ice cream making factory, and an ice cream shop serving ice cream cones. Right next door to each other. The ice cream shop buys its ice cream from the factory next door. The shop represents 2% of the factory's production

Sure, they're both in the "ice cream" business, but if the ice cream shop moved or closed, it wouldn't really matter to the factory.

Now if the shop bought 50% of the factory's production, that's different - the two businesses would really be one.

Trust me, a lot of serious business people get this stuff wrong. They construct elaborate theories about what businesses should be together, and what shouldn't. Figuring out what belongs together, and what doesn't, that's what business is all about.

We have a great live example this week - even though they're both in the "oil" business, the idea of Suncor and Petro Canada merging is a joke. They're in very different parts of the oil business, that have almost nothing to do with each other.

Back to FC Dallas - imho, this one is easy. The 15-17 dates a year that FC Dallas play at PHP is only a small percentage of the use of the PHP facilities. Even if the owner of FC Dallas and PHP is one and the same, he should manage them separately.

Get In There
03-30-2009, 09:06 PM
Say you own an ice cream making factory, and an ice cream shop serving ice cream cones. Right next door to each other. The ice cream shop buys its ice cream from the factory next door. The shop represents 2% of the factory's production

Sure, they're both in the "ice cream" business, but if the ice cream shop moved or closed, it wouldn't really matter to the factory.

Now if the shop bought 50% of the factory's production, that's different - the two businesses would really be one.

Trust me, a lot of serious business people get this stuff wrong. They construct elaborate theories about what businesses should be together, and what shouldn't. Figuring out what belongs together, and what doesn't, that's what business is all about.

We have a great live example this week - even though they're both in the "oil" business, the idea of Suncor and Petro Canada merging is a joke. They're in very different parts of the oil business, that have almost nothing to do with each other.

Back to FC Dallas - imho, this one is easy. The 15-17 dates a year that FC Dallas play at PHP is only a small percentage of the use of the PHP facilities. Even if the owner of FC Dallas and PHP is one and the same, he should manage them separately.


No, In my opinion you're being too simplistic

Could the value in the teams brand be of benefit to the field rentals? Do large concerts bring value to the stadiums brand and public appeal? Seems logical to me

No, I think the poster is right.....trust me people get this stuff wrong all the time ;)

B

Toronto Ruffrider
03-30-2009, 10:18 PM
^^ CCT: One of the few "officially" profitable teams. Sports teams in all genres are notorious for baring unreleased writedowns from parent companies.

That's why, in a year when it allegedly sold more jerseys (250,000) than any other team on Earth, sold out every luxury box and had theleague's highest attendance, the L.A. Galaxy only made $800,000.

Do you really believe TFC is only profitable to the tune of $2.1 million? I'd like to see those line items.

You bring up a good point. It's hard to visualise FC Dallas as being a profitable team, what with the club's attendance record. Dallas had a reported attendance of only 6,500 in last night's game, and that figure doesn't count freebies. Even if every one of those 6,500 tickets was sold, over 90% of the seats at PHP sell for $37 or less, which is a bargain for prime seating. Throw in a few more games with that level of attendance, and it seems more and more like creative accounting is taking place in Dallas.

Toronto Ruffrider
03-30-2009, 10:22 PM
No, In my opinion you're being too simplistic

Could the value in the teams brand be of benefit to the field rentals? Do large concerts bring value to the stadiums brand and public appeal? Seems logical to me

No, I think the poster is right.....trust me people get this stuff wrong all the time ;)

B

Would rentals count toward FC Dallas' profitability? I would think those revenues would be classified under money made by PHP. I could be wrong, but I can't imagine outside sources of revenue counting in FC Dallas' books.

mighty_torontofc_2008
03-30-2009, 10:22 PM
This team needs a DP if just to put fannies in the seats.....lets hope Dalls gets things sorted out attendance wise they can start winning after we play them

Yohan
03-30-2009, 10:25 PM
This team needs a DP if just to put fannies in the seats.....lets hope Dalls gets things sorted out attendance wise they can start winning after we play them
after Denilson and Davino... 3rd time is the charm? lol

Calvin
03-30-2009, 11:09 PM
7) New York 2...another good option..


I understand this sentiment. I have freinds from New York who do not support the red bulls because they play in Jersey. But if you think NYC deserves 2 then why not Toronto? I don't get it we could fill 3 BMO's.

Canary Canuck
03-30-2009, 11:45 PM
after Denilson and Davino... 3rd time is the charm? lol

Their only prayer in Texas is catering to the latinos. They need a popular mexican DP to fill seats (No, not Davino). They should've gotten a guy like Borgetti over the winter. Yeah, he's old but if he sells tix then it's worth it. There's not too many other options other than moving the team back to Dallas. It's tough but the fact is the heavily conservative mainstream population of Dallas is never going to warm to a sport they perceive as foreign and have been trained to hate.

J .
03-31-2009, 12:08 AM
I doubt they will move, their rivalry with Houston is important I would believe. But St. Louis or Ottawa would be the most likely.

Ottawa I think is more USL territory though.

Shakes McQueen
03-31-2009, 01:02 AM
I don't think every team with currently poor attendance should just be relocated. Dallas has the potential to be a great market, due to Texas' huge Hispanic population, and the natural inter-state rivalry with Houston.

Plus, they apparently make money, regardless of attendance figures.

I also think Dallas has a decent crest, and pretty nice jerseys, for what that's worth. :D

Something about hooped football jerseys that I just like.

- Scott

Cashcleaner
03-31-2009, 01:24 AM
As far as I know, FC Dallas is in no way considering a move, nor do I believe the club is in any rough shape, financially. I agree that attendance can be a big indicator of a team's overall success, but it's certainly not the only one. Who knows what sort of tv/radio numbers they're getting.

ensco
03-31-2009, 06:58 AM
Do you really believe TFC is only profitable to the tune of $2.1 million? I'd like to see those line items.

jloome I did this estimate at the end of 2007. I didn't have all the info, especially re merchandise sales, which I believe I have seriously underestimated here, but a lot of the rest is out there. Bottom line - MLSE made $4.5 million that year, cash income, give or take.

It's only gotten better because of the NCC, the elimination of expensive friendlies, the higher merch sales, and the Edu transfer (although the Academy is now up and running, and must cost hundreds of thousands).

I'm guessing MLSE has already recouped more than half of the $18 million they put up for the team/stadium. 4 year payback. Not bad....


MLSE Income Statement for TFC – Cash Basis

Revenues: $8,910,000

Single Tickets $6,407,500
Luxury Boxes $472,500
Food/Beverage $850,000
Merchandise $330,000
Naming Rights $500,000
Parking $150,000
MLSE Management Fee $200,000
Stadium Profit/Loss ??

Expenses: $4,450,000

Sales/Marketing $1,600,000
Technical Staff $1,000,000
Appearances (Friendlies) $1,000,000
Travel $450,000
Game Day Costs $150,000
Maintenance $150,000
Advertising $100,000
DP: $0
Youth Development $0

MLSE Cash Income: approx $4,500,000 + stadium profit/loss
On Cash Investment of: $18 million
Cash Return: 25%

Or (ex stadium deal) 50% ($4 million profit on $8 million invested)



Municipal Taxpayer Perspective

City Revenues: $2,030,000 + stadium profit/loss
On Cash Investment Of: $9.8 million (ignores assigned land value of $10 million)
Cash Return: 21%


Ticket Revenue
• Regular Season Game Tickets:
• $685,500/regular season game at 100% of face value
o West stand: 10000 seats @ avg $40/seat = $400,000/game
o East stand: 7000 seats @ avg $35/seat = $245,000/game
o South stand: 3000 seats @ avg $13.50/seat = $40,500/game
• $541,500/regular season game actual
o Seasons’ tickets (70%) at 30% discount
• $8,122,500/season pre City/MLS share
• Friendlies:
o 6,000 seats @ avg $75/seat = $450,000/game x 2 games
o $900,000/season pre City share (no MLS share assumed)
• Total Ticket Revenue:
• $9,022,500 gross
• Revenue to City: $255,000 (7% , but capped at $15,000/game x 17 games)
• Revenue to MLS: $2,360,000 (30% of remainder ex boxes, ex friendlies)
• Revenue to MLSE: $6,407,500

Luxury Boxes:
• $1,050,000/season (30 boxes @ avg $33,500/box/season) pre City/MLS share
• Revenue to City: $577,500 (55%)
• Revenue to MLSE: $472,500 (45%)

Food/Beverage Concessions
• 20,000 seats @ avg spend $10/seat = $200,000 gross/game
• 25% of gross to City, or $50,000/game
• 25% margin on gross to MLSE, or $50,000/game
• Revenue to City: $850,000 (17 games)
• Revenue to MLSE: $850,000 (17 games)

Total Merchandise Sales: $1,000,000 gross
• this is hard to estimate (estimate based on news report of Tampa Bay Lightning total merchandise sales of $945,000 in 2003 and $4.1 million in 2004)
• Merchandise Sales at BMO
o 100 jerseys/game @ $150 = $15,000 gross/game
o T shirts/bags/hats = $5,000 (?) gross/game
o $340,000 gross/season, less cost of concession operations:
o $1,000/game or $17,000/season
o Revenue to City: $48,000 (15% of $323,000)
o Revenue to MLSE: $160,000 (?) (50% of remainder, rest to MLS/adidas)
• Merchandise Sales ex BMO: $680,000
o Revenue to MLSE: $170,000 (25% of gross, rest to MLS/adidas and retailer)

BMO Naming Rights
• Revenue to MLSE: $500,000/season
o excluded from City sharing calc, offset to $10 million capital commitment

Parking
• 3,000 spots @ $10/game = $30,000/game gross
• $450,000/game gross
• Revenue to MLSE: 1/3, or $150,000
• Revenue to City: 2/3, or $300,000

MLSE Management Fee (per agreement with City)
• $200,000

Stadium Advertising and Carlsberg Sponsorship
• Shared by MLSE and City more or less equally (along with stadium profits and losses)
• MLSE gets first $250,000 of profit, then City get next $250,000, then profits shared 50/50
• Unknown

MLSE Costs:

Sales/Marketing
• $1,600,000
• Assume average $60,000 x 26 people
• http://toronto.fc.mlsnet.com/t280/about/meet_us/
• Plus $50,000 costs allocated from MLSE (eg ticketing)

Techical Staff
• Mo + 8 assistants/trainer/physician/managers
• $1,000,000 (?)

Travel (Airfare/Hotel/Meals + Other)
• $450,000
o $20,000/game airfare x 15 games = $300,000/season
o $7,500/game hotel x 15 games = $112,500/season
o $2,500/game meals/other=$37,500

Game Day Costs
• $150,000
• Security/utilities etc
• $10,000/game x 15 games

BMO Maintenance
• $150,000
• 2 employees x $50,000/per person + materials

Advertising
• $100,000 (?)
• Mostly done in tandem with BMO and City of Toronto (ie flags on street poles)

Youth Development
• $0 (?)

Designated Player
• $0 (?)

Appearance Fees for Friendlies
• $1,000,000/season
• $500,000/game (?) (2 games)

Total Costs:
• $4,450,000


General Discussion:
http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=article.main&requesttimeout=500&articleId=55203

Cost of Naming Rights:
http://www.thestar.com/printArticle/95606

Revenue Sharing with City of Toronto:
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/2005/agendas/council/cc051026/pof9rpt/cl036.pdf



Some Key Conclusions:

1) This has been a hugely profitable deal for MLSE, and a nice deal for the City
2) As the City are true partners here (eg get 55% of luxury box revenue), and both MLSE and the City are incented to grow TFC revenues, there will be no problem sorting out expansion of BMO (note that the specs required that the stadium could be expanded to 30,000)
3) Friendlies are unprofitable (assuming the $500,000 appearance fee for Benfica/Villa is accurate), that’s why there are only two
4) Significant future expenditure areas will be DP, and youth development

ensco
03-31-2009, 07:15 AM
No, In my opinion you're being too simplistic

Could the value in the teams brand be of benefit to the field rentals? Do large concerts bring value to the stadiums brand and public appeal? Seems logical to me

No, I think the poster is right.....trust me people get this stuff wrong all the time ;)

B

It's in the details. I think you're talking about seriously marginal revenue streams there. Concerts could be good in theory, but there are tons of good outdoor venues in Dallas/Ft Worth, and this one's not very central. A cursory look at Ticketmaster would show that there are exactly five non-FC Dallas events there in the next 6 months.

http://www.ticketmaster.com/search?tm_link=tm_homeA_header_search&q=pizza+hut+park&search.x=50&search.y=17

And all of them would be there even if FC Dallas played in Anchorage.

Of course, why bother with the facts, it's much more fun just to give us the benefit of your deep thinking...

profit89
03-31-2009, 07:25 AM
FCD operates in the black. As long as that happens, they are not going anywhere, nor should they. The key is controlling revenues from a SSS.

profit89
03-31-2009, 07:27 AM
...It's not like they get 6K every week. they average about 13K, 12K is the minimum you need to be profitable in the average SSS. FC Dalls probably needs even less due to all the soccer fields.

As I said in another tread urban stadiums aren't the only business model in this league to turn a profit. TFC has one and FCD has another model and both work.

Exactly right.

troy1982
03-31-2009, 07:30 AM
It's in the details. I think you're talking about seriously marginal revenue streams there. Concerts could be good in theory, but there are tons of good outdoor venues in Dallas/Ft Worth, and this one's not very central. A cursory look at Ticketmaster would show that there are exactly five non-FC Dallas events there in the next 6 months.

http://www.ticketmaster.com/search?tm_link=tm_homeA_header_search&q=pizza+hut+park&search.x=50&search.y=17

And all of them would be there even if FC Dallas played in Anchorage.

Of course, why bother with the facts, it's much more fun just to give us the benefit of your deep thinking...

10 concerts date a year brings in plenty of revenue. Plus all the soccer fields which they rent out brings in a boat load of cash. So the 16 FC Dallas home games don't even need to crack 10K for them to be profitable.

boban
03-31-2009, 07:31 AM
After the dismal attendance vs Chivas less then 7,000 its time Garber should really think about getting this team relocated to a city that will support a decent franchise..We all know Dallas and Texas support the "other" football strongly and FC Dallas does not look like ever making\
a deep impact in the city...so move it!!

Possible strong football cities where FC Dallas could go:
1) Minnesota...the old NASL Kicks had decent support
2) Montreal/Ottawa..either city could at least double the Dallas support
3) San Diego....that looks more likely as a new home for Chivas USA
4) Tampa Bay...decent soccer market
5) St Louis....this might be the best home for FC Dallas. soccer city usa
6) Detroit...this could bring big thime football to the city...sorry Lions fans
7) New York 2...another good option..

So Mr Garber you have plenty of Options...no one likes to see teams
relocate..bu with FC Dallas...you really do have No choice!!
Everyone has an opinion it seems.
This sky is falling attitude by some here is amazing.
So they have a few low attended games. So what? The team makes money. And its the long run that matters. The team has been one of the better ones over the history of the league. The bigger issue is to get the team improved and winning. The people will come. Honestly, do you always run when things get tough?
:rolleyes:

ensco
03-31-2009, 07:31 AM
Exactly right.

No it's exactly wrong.

The point is, even if the STADIUM makes money, the TEAM doesn't, not without attendance or TV revenues.

It's different in the NHL and NBA, where you have 45 home dates with 18,000 people paying on average $100/ticket. In those leagues, the stadium and team are truly a single integrated business.

In MLS, with 17 home dates, 12,000 attendance (in Dallas I'll bet paid attendance is closer to 6,000), and $20 tickets, the stadium can't come close to surviving on the soccer revenue alone.

MLS doesn't have to have a money-losing soccer team in Dallas. Clark Hunt doesn't care because of the single entity system. PHP would do fine without it.

Bender
03-31-2009, 10:10 AM
Detroit?!! Not in these economic times. They've been hit worse than anybody else.

Get In There
03-31-2009, 03:22 PM
It's in the details. I think you're talking about seriously marginal revenue streams there. Concerts could be good in theory, but there are tons of good outdoor venues in Dallas/Ft Worth, and this one's not very central. A cursory look at Ticketmaster would show that there are exactly five non-FC Dallas events there in the next 6 months.

http://www.ticketmaster.com/search?tm_link=tm_homeA_header_search&q=pizza+hut+park&search.x=50&search.y=17

And all of them would be there even if FC Dallas played in Anchorage.

Of course, why bother with the facts, it's much more fun just to give us the benefit of your deep thinking...

No, you still have not proven the contensions of the original poster wrong - it's a profitable business - I know, branding means nothing - 5 concerts here mean nothing - a few field rentals there mean nothing - 11,000 seats here mean nothing - 12,000 seats there mean nothing - and yes, your supositions are facts.

You want a business lesson son.....every dollar counts.

No matter how much you huff and posture, just cuz you say don't make it so........... But don't worry, people who are full of shit do that kind of thing all the time ;)

B

james
03-31-2009, 03:30 PM
you guys act like we have to move a team. DC United have been looking to build a stadium in near by marryland.

Hitcho
03-31-2009, 03:55 PM
I understand this sentiment. I have freinds from New York who do not support the red bulls because they play in Jersey. But if you think NYC deserves 2 then why not Toronto? I don't get it we could fill 3 BMO's.

No way could we fill 3 BMO's. A large part of the waiting list consists of people who already have season tickets and want a couple of extra tickets for friends or family - ie they probably wouldn't be going to a separate game at a separate team without the original SSH. Another large part probably consists of scalpers. Also, all of the die hard footie fans have already been captured by TFC - there aren;t any left for a new franchise to tap into. Plus TO doesn;t have the geography to support another footie team because we all feel like we belong to the same (relatively small, in global terms) city - there's no NY/NJ split, for example, or at least not on a big enough scale to get 20,000+ people per side.

Ask yourself this - why isn't there a second NHL team here? if the profit was there to be made through filling another ACC then someone would have done it.

I think we could (and one day will) fill an expanded BMO on a weekly basis, but that's about it.

ensco
03-31-2009, 04:04 PM
No, you still have not proven the contensions of the original poster wrong - it's a profitable business - I know, branding means nothing - 5 concerts here mean nothing - a few field rentals there mean nothing - 11,000 seats here mean nothing - 12,000 seats there mean nothing - and yes, your supositions are facts.

You want a business lesson son.....every dollar counts.

No matter how much you huff and posture, just cuz you say don't make it so........... But don't worry, people who are full of shit do that kind of thing all the time ;)

B

Come on back once you've learned how to spell

jloome
03-31-2009, 04:12 PM
Come on back once you've learned how to spell

That's cheap and beneath you. I'd suggest you come on back when you know how to punctuate, but I respect your intelligence.

ensco
03-31-2009, 04:17 PM
That's cheap and beneath you. I'd suggest you come on back when you know how to punctuate, but I respect your intelligence.

Ah that's good you got me!

I just don't like being called "son" and told I'm full of shit by someone whose argument makes no sense and has 7 spelling errors in his post. I don't know why I care.

trane
03-31-2009, 04:18 PM
Jeez, If people pointed out all my sytax/spelling mistakes on this board, it would be never ending. I need to find a way to get spell check on this.

jloome
03-31-2009, 04:19 PM
Ah that's good you got me!

I just don't like being called "son" and told I'm full of shit by someone whose argument makes no sense and has 7 spelling errors in his post. I don't know why I care.

Hmmm, true enough. I've said worse.

ensco
03-31-2009, 04:19 PM
Jeez, If people pointed out all my sytax/spelling mistakes on this board, it would be never ending. I need to find a way to get spell check on this.

Sytax is a problem for me too.

jloome
03-31-2009, 04:19 PM
Jeez, If people pointed out all my sytax/spelling mistakes on this board, it would be never ending. I need to find a way to get spell check on this.

I think you meant "syntax.":D

trane
03-31-2009, 04:24 PM
^ exactly. I complain about it myslef. The problem is I am always doing something else while on the board.

Cristiano14
03-31-2009, 05:26 PM
No way could we fill 3 BMO's. A large part of the waiting list consists of people who already have season tickets and want a couple of extra tickets for friends or family - ie they probably wouldn't be going to a separate game at a separate team without the original SSH. Another large part probably consists of scalpers. Also, all of the die hard footie fans have already been captured by TFC - there aren;t any left for a new franchise to tap into. Plus TO doesn;t have the geography to support another footie team because we all feel like we belong to the same (relatively small, in global terms) city - there's no NY/NJ split, for example, or at least not on a big enough scale to get 20,000+ people per side.

Ask yourself this - why isn't there a second NHL team here? if the profit was there to be made through filling another ACC then someone would have done it.

I think we could (and one day will) fill an expanded BMO on a weekly basis, but that's about it.

Yeah good points, but i think in the long term, it maybe be possible for Toronto/ GTA to get another USL or MLS team, once soccer really takes off and gets a stronger hold in the country. And it would make a great derby if it did work,(FAR better than LAs Galaxy-Chivas) but you never know no1 expected TFC to be as successful as it is today:D

Cashcleaner
04-01-2009, 01:28 AM
^ I dunno. I don't see anyone else in Toronto wanting to support another team. The idea of a cross-town rival is cool and all, but I'd say the outlook is doubtful.

Calvin
04-01-2009, 04:54 AM
No way could we fill 3 BMO's. A large part of the waiting list consists of people who already have season tickets and want a couple of extra tickets for friends or family - ie they probably wouldn't be going to a separate game at a separate team without the original SSH. Another large part probably consists of scalpers. Also, all of the die hard footie fans have already been captured by TFC - there aren;t any left for a new franchise to tap into. Plus TO doesn;t have the geography to support another footie team because we all feel like we belong to the same (relatively small, in global terms) city - there's no NY/NJ split, for example, or at least not on a big enough scale to get 20,000+ people per side.

Ask yourself this - why isn't there a second NHL team here? if the profit was there to be made through filling another ACC then someone would have done it.

I think we could (and one day will) fill an expanded BMO on a weekly basis, but that's about it.

We do have geographical splits. Half our fans come from the northern burbs to come to down to game... Hamilton?

Yohan
04-01-2009, 07:06 AM
We do have geographical splits. Half our fans come from the northern burbs to come to down to game... Hamilton?
it'll be Gals vs Chivas situation all over again

DOMIN8R
04-01-2009, 12:44 PM
MLS Seeks Mexican Solution to FC Dallas Problem

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/148741-mls-seeks-mexican-solution-to-fc-dallas-problem

Interesting.