View Poll Results: Should MLS buy TFC?

Voters
76. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    25 32.89%
  • No

    51 67.11%
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 61 to 70 of 70
  1. #61
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    159
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fort York Redcoat View Post
    ^You could always downgrade next year. I don't see why anyone would be jealous of scalped tix.
    I'm certainly not jealous other people were smarter than I. I do feel stupid though, there will be no problem cherry picking games next season. There will be no need for season seats. That is the door that has been opened and any new owner would have to be prepared to wait a couple of years to get full houses back. That is why I think the franchise value is in freefall. Obvious to all the longer we lose the longer to get bandwagoners like myself, back to full season seats.

  2. #62
    Registered
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    6,451
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Whoop View Post
    At this stage, is TFC even turning a profit and making money for MLS?

    I'd be interested to see.
    Sure would. Best numbers we have are Forbes' estimate that TFC had a net operating income of $2.1M in 2007. Later, in 2009, they said that TFC and Seattle were the only clubs turning a profit (though didn't release the figures).

    That was before our payroll climbed to $8.3M per season and before they dropped the money on the Academy ($17.6M total) and grass surface for the 2010 season (estimated $5M). I have no idea how those two expenses are amortized. On the revenue side, 2007 and 2009 ticket prices are not what they are now but did revenue climb that much? They aren't the sell out they once were.

    Sure would be interesting to see the outcome of another team valuation.

  3. #63
    RPB Member
    Moderator

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    On the Interwebs
    Posts
    18,703
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Sponsorships are up since 2007.

  4. #64
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    116
    Posts
    2,727
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oldtimer View Post
    Sponsorships are up since 2007.
    Significantly, if I remember the press release about the new deal with BMO. So are the TV rights, I'd think. I'd hardly think revenue from ticket sales is down from 2007, given that there were 15 competitive home games that year, and we will have a minimum of 21 this year; 23 if we beat Vancouver. 23 last year. Actual attendance may be a beat weaker, but I'm not sure the sales are down much, and lord knows the prices have gone up.

    I don't think building the academy facilities would be an operational cost. I'm sure the academy operational cost is up a bit, but not where near the cost of a DP or two.

  5. #65
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Betwixt the waters of the Humber and the Credit
    Posts
    6,460
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm saving myself for the poll on whether MLSE should buy us an ice cream
    Last edited by Kevvv; 05-13-2012 at 09:39 PM. Reason: derp

  6. #66
    RPB Member
    Moderator

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    On the Interwebs
    Posts
    18,703
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    SUM is a lot more profitable, too. The "losses" that most MLS clubs were showing was a bargaining tool for the negotiations leading up to the latest contract. They deliberately excluded all SUM profits from the calculation.

    That means of course they are excluding TV revenues (which go through SUM), and revenues for friendlies against Euro or Mexican clubs, all of which use MLS players. (One could argue to exclude SUM revenues from Mexican MNT matches played in the US, when dealing with the union, although not for MLS club profitability). SUM is a massive money machine, and being the owner/operator of an MLS franchise means that cash flows into your profits.
    Last edited by Oldtimer; 05-13-2012 at 10:04 PM.

  7. #67
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    116
    Posts
    2,727
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm blanking .... SUM?

  8. #68
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    West Siiiiide
    Posts
    24,273
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The marketing and arm of MLS and US Soccer I believe. "Soccer United Marketing" or something like that.

  9. #69
    RPB Member
    Moderator

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    On the Interwebs
    Posts
    18,703
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    SUM = "Soccer United Marketing"

    http://www.sumworld.com/

    Founded in 2002, Soccer United Marketing (SUM) is the preeminent soccer business company in North America. SUM holds the exclusive rights to the most important soccer properties in the region, including: all commercial rights to Major League Soccer; the United States Soccer Federation; promotional and marketing rights to Mexican National Team games played in the United States; and the CONCACAF Gold Cup™. SUM also manages promotional and marketing rights in the United States for Mexico’s most popular sports team, Club Deportivo Guadalajara (Chivas).

    In 2008, SUM entered into a long term partnership with FC Barcelona which includes tours of the legendary Spanish club. In early 2009, SUM announced the creation of the SUM Digital Network, the only soccer advertising network of its kind, covering all facets of the sport in the U.S., and which allows advertisers to reach millions of soccer fans via online advertising and sponsorships campaigns. These global properties are represented by SUM’s slogan: One Sport. One Company.™ For more information, please visit www.SUMworld.com.
    It's mostly owned by the MLS Clubs (a small portion was sold recently). Owning an MLS Club gives you a stake in SUM. The real money in MLS doesn't come from the team you own, it's from the portion of SUM.

  10. #70
    Registered
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    6,451
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    ^ that SUM connection between Barcelona and MLS could explain why Henry and Marquez had a $0 transfer fee set by Barcelona if they ended up in New York. Fee was rumoured to be $5M for any other club, including MLS teams.

    You know, if you believed in the "League wants certain markets to be successful" theory. Seems both the league and SUM could gain a benefit from increased media exposure in the largest market.

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •