Today's News,Thursday,Jan.28

[denime]

Mornin'


Onstad 'cautiously optimistic' about MLS labour deal (http://www.cbc.ca/sports/soccer/story/2010/01/27/sp-mls-labour.html)


Notes From Around The League (http://toronto.fc.mlsnet.com/news/team_news.jsp?ymd=20100127&content_id=7974560&vkey=news_t280&fext=.jsp&team=t280)


MLS and players can't afford to disagree (http://soccernet.espn.go.com/columns/story?id=731994&sec=mls&root=mls&cc=5901)



SUNSHINE (http://www.torontosun.com/sunshinegirl/)

[DOMIN8R]

Simply put, MLS sides aren't making money. They might get close in Los Angeles, thanks to merchandise sales related to a certain handsome English international. And they might be getting there in Toronto, although initial stadium construction costs will eat away at annual profits for years to come.

MLS and players can't afford to disagree
http://www.redpatchboys.ca/forums/newreply.php?do=postreply&t=19901

[boban]

^^ The guy doesn't know what he's talking about.
The NSS is a tin can/leggo block that cost MLSE only $8 mil. That's been recouped.

[keem-o-sabi]

coed girls 1 (http://coedmagazine.com/2010/01/28/pretty-pigtails-girls-2/) and 2 (http://coedmagazine.com/2010/01/27/miss-coed-kristen-gillespie-2/) and 3 (http://coedmagazine.com/2010/01/26/melissa-rogers-is-today%E2%80%99s-daily-snapshot/)

[daner90]

Hooray for the SSG today, looking good!!

Morning all

[CoachGT]

The stuff about costs taking time is probably true. From a business standpoint, the cost of constructuion will be amortized over the life of the stadium. Right now (and probably for the foreseeable future) the annual revenues exceed the portion of the cost that gets paid down (in effect) every year. It'll probably take a few years to pay it off (just like any mortgage), but that doesn't mean that MLSE and the city aren't already showing a profit from it.

And I'm very hopeful that the CBA gets worked out soon.

[boban]

The stuff about costs taking time is probably true. From a business standpoint, the cost of constructuion will be amortized over the life of the stadium. Right now (and probably for the foreseeable future) the annual revenues exceed the portion of the cost that gets paid down (in effect) every year. It'll probably take a few years to pay it off (just like any mortgage), but that doesn't mean that MLSE and the city aren't already showing a profit from it.

And I'm very hopeful that the CBA gets worked out soon.
MLSE doesn't invest in things that take longer than 3 years to get paid back.

[Oldtimer]

The stuff about costs taking time is probably true. From a business standpoint, the cost of constructuion will be amortized over the life of the stadium. Right now (and probably for the foreseeable future) the annual revenues exceed the portion of the cost that gets paid down (in effect) every year. It'll probably take a few years to pay it off (just like any mortgage), but that doesn't mean that MLSE and the city aren't already showing a profit from it.

And I'm very hopeful that the CBA gets worked out soon.

So let me guess, $8 million over 20 years works out to a "drain on profits" of $400k per year, or about the profits from beer for just two matches. Wow, I feel sorry for MLSE having such a "drain" on their profit$. :lol:

[scooter]

mornin d

remember tonight is canadian soccer coaches society meet up
with stuart neeley from tfc acadamy speaking
hope to see a lot of you there at 7pm @ sports alliance
see coach gt's thread for more info

[gtaguy]

what about other events that get hosted in the stadium, friendlies seem to make them money look at real madrid. what about the lacrosse team playing there , bill clinton speech at BMO are ones i remember clearly . Im sure that these events are helping pay down the debt aswell.

[Nuvinho]

Would Preki be interested in any of them?



+ Chivas USA has waived (http://www.insidesocal.com/soccer/2010/01/chivas-usa-changes-date-of-sea.html) veteran defender Jim Curtin and midfielder Bojan Stepanovic.
+ Chivas are still awaiting a decision (http://www.dailynews.com/sports/ci_14273924) from Ante Razov on his playing future.

[Shaughno]

Bojan Stepanovic was signed by Preki... I wouldn't be against picking him up on the cheap.

[Nuvinho]

Bojan Stepanovic was signed by Preki... I wouldn't be against picking him up on the cheap.

Jim Curtin, don't know how much about this guy or how much he has played the past year or so, but 30 year old MLS CB.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Curtin

Curtin just under $110K
Stepanovic $120K

[CoachGT]

what about other events that get hosted in the stadium, friendlies seem to make them money look at real madrid. what about the lacrosse team playing there , bill clinton speech at BMO are ones i remember clearly . Im sure that these events are helping pay down the debt aswell.

Actually, they increase the top line.

Look at it this way (for the accountants in the group, this is very simplified). If the stadium cost $18 million (which is closer to the real figure - $10 million of the "cost" was recouped in naming rights) and is expected to last, say 18 years, then the stadium cost would be $1 million per year. Deduct the naming rights ($10 million for 10 years) and anything you make in the first ten years would be profit (over the costs of operation). If the stadium is empty, then there is no additional income (but there may be costs for security, heating of the main building, and so on). But if it is used, then it generates income.

MLSE also has the concession rights (if I recall correctly).

As for three year payback, that may be the case, but the cost benefit is probably built over a larger number of years. And I believe the original case put together had expectations of less than sellouts for a few years.

Are MLSE and the city ahead of the game? You bet! But maybe not for the full cost just yet.

[Shaughno]

Jim Curtin, don't know how much about this guy or how much he has played the past year or so, but 30 year old MLS CB.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Curtin

Curtin just under $110K
Stepanovic $120K


Now that I look at his wiki, I do remember him. Solid CB from what I remember, but why did the Fire trade him for a conditional pick in the draft?

[Roogsy]

The point is that it is a ridiculous notion that players should have to wait until all the teams or most of the teams are making money to get compensated fairly. Unless the players are negotiating some sort of profit-sharing agreement where they own parts of the team that they are playing for, this should be a straight up contract that deals with what a professional soccer player should be getting paid.

Whether or not the team or the league makes money is irrelevant although from their perspective obviously they need a plan that works for them as well.

When you build a house, you don't tell the carpenter that you will pay him half his wages until the house is built and then if the house sells at a profit you will pay him more. That is ridiculous.

[rocker]

The point is that it is a ridiculous notion that players should have to wait until all the teams or most of the teams are making money to get compensated fairly.

define "compensated fairly" ;)

There is not such thing as fair compensation. Everyone has a different opinion of what fairness entails.

I think many of the players in this league are compensated fairly for what they do. Maybe you disagree. Neither of us are right in some absolute sense.

Compensation only occurs through negotiation (or not, if you just take the offer), which is a power battle. If the owners want to say the players shouldn't get more until teams are making a profit, that's not ridiculous, that's their argument. It's up to the players to then argue something the opposite. Your analogy of the house has nothing to do with fairness of the salary but fairness of getting paid at all. Of course the players will get paid.

It's not like the league is saying "Players, we won't pay you ANYTHING until the league makes a profit."

This is like negotiating a price with the carpenter for his services and saying "look, I'm not a rich guy... I'll pay you $100 right now even though you want $1million... what do you think?" Then it's up to the carpenter to negotiate.

If the players think the teams are lying about profits, then call them on it. Even if you can't see the books, you can believe they are making a profit and negotiate accordingly. If it's a negotiating trick on the part of owners then don't fall for it.

[keem-o-sabi]

it is what it is for now. I agree with you rocker. It's an open market, it's actually one of the only sports that this applies to. Our league can not offer a lot of players a lot of money, it's just the way it is at the moment.

In the interim we'll continue to lose the mid-tier journeymen type player to scandanavia, who eventually come back (it seems like 95% of them come back, Troy Perkins being the latest). Eventually the league will be able to pay those players a little more than the paltry sums they were making in MLS before their moves and make it so they can stay, but then again is it good if that happens? That opens up less opportunities for younger players who are cheaper and may not be just as good, but have an upside that is probably more fair to the owners of the league.

The good young players get paid well, the last guy on the bench young player does not. It's like being in graphic design, a lot of my friends spent like 90k on art school...unless you are the best of the best in graphic design which only 1 of the 9 was, you're not going to get a job and are now on the hook for 90k. If the young players were any better in MLS, MLS would renegotiate their contract to a higher figure or try to at least. You get good paying jobs when you're good. It's just the way it is.

Just because they seem to be making money now (the owners) doesn't make up for the fact that they had about 12-13 years of losing tremendous amounts of it. The league didn't start when TFC entered it and a lot of you have to come to that realization. It's great we have TFC, but some of you really need to look at what happened from 96-to '06 (well really look at 96-to '02). It was a nightmare, the league almost folded except for Phil Anschultz and Lamar Hunt floating all the money to run the league. Yes they owned 9 of the 10 teams at the time (Phil, LA, DC, NY, Colorado, Chicago; Lamar KC, C'bus, Dallas). It was a mess.

If the league was to spend anymore money it would probably be on front office staff. If you look at the NBA, for example, they have pretty much 100 people for every job that an MLS person does in their front office. That is the reason why the league is where it is, they can't generate the revenue because they don't have the support staff. Even if we paid the players each 10-15k more a year, it would still be the same players, playing at the same level. I say this all the time, so I guess I'll stop on my rant against those who think MLS is stupid and Don G is dumb, but seriously, go back and read everything that happened from 96-02 and then start to realize the league didn't start in '07. it's grown tremendously, but it's not anywhere near financially sound as everyone seems to speculate here.

[billyfly]

http://www.football365.com/story/0,17033,8652_5890464,00.html

Pompey's website shut down.

[devioustrevor]

http://www.football365.com/story/0,17033,8652_5890464,00.html

Pompey's website shut down.


It's a little sad to see how quickly things have gone to shite there. Just two years removed from winning the FA Cup and not too long removed from being a team that could contend for European qualification.

[werewolf]

Should never have sold Collins Mbesuma!