Jump to content


Photo
* * * - - 2 votes

A good explanation of the numbers...


  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

#16 Panthro

Panthro

    aka Pablo

  • Moderators
  • 24,328 posts

Posted 08 March 2013 - 09:20 AM

The Panthers are the Golden Goose that turned uptown Charlotte into a real and vibrant city. It caused businesses to buy warehouses. It turned vacant lots into condos. This is not about funding a profitable business, it is about keeping the golden goose here for a decade or more.


I could turn that around and say that the success of the Panthers is directly linked to the city of Charlotte... being one of the fastest growing and largest financial areas in the country.

#17 rayzor

rayzor

    shula is who i thought he was.

  • Moderators
  • -29,194 posts

Posted 08 March 2013 - 09:21 AM

The Panthers are the Golden Goose that turned uptown Charlotte into a real and vibrant city. It caused businesses to buy warehouses. It turned vacant lots into condos. This is not about funding a profitable business, it is about keeping the golden goose here for a decade or more.

agreed, but i wouldn't say 'the' golden goose but 'a' golden goose. the region benefits from it and has for years. it brings more attention to the area and makes it more high profile. it's a draw for people to move to the area and a perk to prospective companys and employees considering moving there.

#18 rayzor

rayzor

    shula is who i thought he was.

  • Moderators
  • -29,194 posts

Posted 08 March 2013 - 09:23 AM

I could turn that around and say that the success of the Panthers is directly linked to the city of Charlotte... being one of the fastest growing and largest financial areas in the country.

it's mutual...and that's not a bad thing at all. it's supposed to be that way. its a win/win.

#19 xerxes

xerxes

    Junior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 684 posts

Posted 08 March 2013 - 09:24 AM

From reddit, I know its blocked for some people at work so I pasted here. From "allsecretsknown" on reddit...


Anyone around here have the slightest bit of accounting experience? No? Didn't think so.

1.) In 2010 the team heavily cut salary in preparation for the lockout, hence the huge upswing on "operating" profit.
Operating profit != permanent cash in the bank, it is positive cash flow for that season alone. The lockout itself had the potential to wipe out an entire season of games with the way the feelings between ownership and players were going into the lockout, so Richardson had the team shed salary in order to build up a cash balance to fallback on in case games were lost. Obviously, they weren't, but a $78 million operating profit (including revenue sharing) is NOT a yearly profit take for any NFL franchise. Once games resumed and the Panthers started handing out huge contracts to the likes of DeAngelo Williams, that operating profit figure shriveled. What fans tend to forget about signing bonuses, is that while their hit can be spread over up to five years of the contract, they are paid immediately and come directly out of the team's operating cash reserves. The Panthers went into 2010 with $70 million because they didn't pay anyone, but in 2011 they handed out over $50 million in signing bonuses.

2.) One of the biggest reasons Richardson horded cash before the lockout was so, unlike many other NFL owners, he wouldn't have to fire or impose salary cuts on the hundreds of non-player employees in the Panthers organization. Contrast that with the owners who suspended the pay of their entire scouting departments and forced people to look for temporary jobs or new ones entirely.

3.) A payout of $15 million split between Richardson and his collection of minority owners, which is itself an infrequent occurrence (generally NFL teams pay out to their minor investors only once every three years, or even not all in some cases) from a business worth around a billion dollars is laughable in comparison to the compensation prevalent in other businesses of comparable size. You're basically talking about splitting a mid-tier free agent's signing bonus amongst twelve to fifteen people.

4.) This is classic case of cherry-picking numbers to fit a narrative. Revenue numbers have been widely available for one of the league's premiere teams in the Green Bay Packers because they are publicly owned and any reasonable review of their numbers over the last half-decade shows, that while owners are not poverty-stricken by any stretch, they also do not have operating margins that a typical business the size of the NFL would usually have. Where people get on their high horses about the money that teams make is that they find it offensive that teams rake in healthy profits from a business structure that they assume is invulnerable to losing money, which is simply not true: there is no guarantee that the league will continue to be wildly profitable and successful, and there loom some very dangerous dark clouds like the former player lawsuits on the horizon.

5.) Where Deadspin really shows their ass is in regards to Richardson's asking for funds from the city of Charlotte for stadium renovations. First off, the stadium itself was built with barely any public money (the city contributed free land and some infrastructure guarantees) and the figure being requested now is a mere drop in the bucket compared to the figures commanded by other franchises in the NFL. Could the Panthers afford to swing the $140 million themselves? Maybe, but it would require either the majority of their operating income and hampering their future operating cash flow, or taking out a loan. Contrary to what people think, loans for sports franchises are not considered low-risk in the financial realm, which is why the NFL's low-interest loan system even exists. The other aspect to the request for funds is that it gives Richardson a legal mechanism to tie the Panthers to Charlotte for the life of the taxpayer's funding in the likely case he dies soon and the team is sold to a new owner (Richardson seems to have given up on passing the team to his sons, who feuded in their earlier tenures with the franchise.) He wants the team to stay in Carolina, and getting the city and state to kickback a hundred million compared to their estimated $800 million in tax revenue the team has generated in its tenure is not anywhere near as dastardly as the con job pulled on the Minnesota taxpayers over the Vikings potential move to LA.

6.) The lockout wasn't about teams running into the red. They absolutely played poverty-stricken and milked the sob story, but it wasn't about losing money. It was about the fact that the NFL is about to reach it's saturation point in the U.S. market and teams are no longer guaranteed ever-increasing revenues at the rates they had been achieving them through the 90s and 2000s. The CBA as written before depended on ever-climbing salary caps, and the league was about to hit a period where there weren't going to be any for a while. So, the owners and the players bitched about it all for a while, and that was that. The owners came out on the sweet end of the deal, if only because the slow return from the recession will make the austerity level revenue numbers they were turning during the lockout evolve into extremely healthy profits. However, the new salary cap floor will likely stunt profit growths as well.

If anyone actually gave a good goddamn about what the fug these numbers meant it wouldn't be a story, but it's Deadspin so, whatever.


Actually, while I won't claim to be an expert by any means, I do have some accounting experience.

1) Operating profit isn't cash flow either. It is operating income calculated by Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). But your point about signing bonuses is correct. Following GAAP signing bonuses would be recognized as an expense over the course of the player's contract as the expense was recognized while the cash would be recognized as soon as they paid the players.

Thus operating income could be substantially higher than cash flow in a year with significant signing bonuses.

2) True. His profits would have actually been much higher if they had laid off more staff.

3) Again true; however, in a free market sense, risk should be the ultimate calculator of return. What's riskier being an NFL owner or being an NFL player?

4) I don't think most people begrudge the owners for making money. The trouble is if you tell me you have 200 million dollars in negative cash flow, and you're actually up conservatively 30 million. That's a lot of horse poo to swallow. Add that on top of owners holding cities hostage for free tax payer money, and it gets annoying. Lot's not even mention the product on the field for the past few years.

5) It's hypocritical in the extreme. How often has JR flaunted his privately funded stadium? And Debt can actually help improve financial returns if managed properly because interest functions as a tax shield. There are other ways to ensure the franchise stays in Carolina besides holding the city hostage.

6) I don't doubt there needed to be some readjustment to ensure the long-term stability of the league, and in some ways I can appreciate a manufactured short-term 'crisis' to force long-term thinking. I get how, "we're bleeding money" sells a lot better than "in order to manage the long-term risk factors of the NFL a profit sharing adjustment is necessary to provide stability and hedge again future concerns" but they were still talking bullshit.

The reality is, if our team was winning, we all wouldn't give a flying fug what the numbers are. But in the the meantime they smack of hypocrisy, and as a fan who does understand the numbers, I am frustrated and annoyed.

#20 Panthro

Panthro

    aka Pablo

  • Moderators
  • 24,328 posts

Posted 08 March 2013 - 09:28 AM

So my question is if the team is sold what happens to everyone's PSLs? Are they refunded?

Oh and if you want to know who has skin in the game....

The Carolina Panthers became the first NFL team to start selling PSLs back in 1993. The sale raised $122 million for the team's $187 million stadium that opened in 1996.

#21 Floppin

Floppin

    Smooches

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,734 posts
  • LocationShallotte, NC

Posted 08 March 2013 - 09:41 AM

So my question is if the team is sold what happens to everyone's PSLs? Are they refunded?

Oh and if you want to know who has skin in the game....

The Carolina Panthers became the first NFL team to start selling PSLs back in 1993. The sale raised $122 million for the team's $187 million stadium that opened in 1996.

http://www.newsobserver.com/2013/01/29/2639614/psl-is-forever-unless-panthers.html

Short answer is no. And technically the team doesn't even have to move cities. Just building a new stadium would technically void any PSL as they are tied to the stadium and not the team.

#22 top dawg

top dawg

    The Creative Cat

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,732 posts
  • LocationWITHIN MY MIND'S EYE

Posted 08 March 2013 - 09:43 AM

From reddit, I know its blocked for some people at work so I pasted here. From "allsecretsknown" on reddit...


Anyone around here have the slightest bit of accounting experience? No? Didn't think so.

1.) In 2010 the team heavily cut salary in preparation for the lockout, hence the huge upswing on "operating" profit.
Operating profit != permanent cash in the bank, it is positive cash flow for that season alone. The lockout itself had the potential to wipe out an entire season of games with the way the feelings between ownership and players were going into the lockout, so Richardson had the team shed salary in order to build up a cash balance to fallback on in case games were lost. Obviously, they weren't, but a $78 million operating profit (including revenue sharing) is NOT a yearly profit take for any NFL franchise. Once games resumed and the Panthers started handing out huge contracts to the likes of DeAngelo Williams, that operating profit figure shriveled. What fans tend to forget about signing bonuses, is that while their hit can be spread over up to five years of the contract, they are paid immediately and come directly out of the team's operating cash reserves. The Panthers went into 2010 with $70 million because they didn't pay anyone, but in 2011 they handed out over $50 million in signing bonuses.

2.) One of the biggest reasons Richardson horded cash before the lockout was so, unlike many other NFL owners, he wouldn't have to fire or impose salary cuts on the hundreds of non-player employees in the Panthers organization. Contrast that with the owners who suspended the pay of their entire scouting departments and forced people to look for temporary jobs or new ones entirely.

3.) A payout of $15 million split between Richardson and his collection of minority owners, which is itself an infrequent occurrence (generally NFL teams pay out to their minor investors only once every three years, or even not all in some cases) from a business worth around a billion dollars is laughable in comparison to the compensation prevalent in other businesses of comparable size. You're basically talking about splitting a mid-tier free agent's signing bonus amongst twelve to fifteen people.

4.) This is classic case of cherry-picking numbers to fit a narrative. Revenue numbers have been widely available for one of the league's premiere teams in the Green Bay Packers because they are publicly owned and any reasonable review of their numbers over the last half-decade shows, that while owners are not poverty-stricken by any stretch, they also do not have operating margins that a typical business the size of the NFL would usually have. Where people get on their high horses about the money that teams make is that they find it offensive that teams rake in healthy profits from a business structure that they assume is invulnerable to losing money, which is simply not true: there is no guarantee that the league will continue to be wildly profitable and successful, and there loom some very dangerous dark clouds like the former player lawsuits on the horizon.

5.) Where Deadspin really shows their ass is in regards to Richardson's asking for funds from the city of Charlotte for stadium renovations. First off, the stadium itself was built with barely any public money (the city contributed free land and some infrastructure guarantees) and the figure being requested now is a mere drop in the bucket compared to the figures commanded by other franchises in the NFL. Could the Panthers afford to swing the $140 million themselves? Maybe, but it would require either the majority of their operating income and hampering their future operating cash flow, or taking out a loan. Contrary to what people think, loans for sports franchises are not considered low-risk in the financial realm, which is why the NFL's low-interest loan system even exists. The other aspect to the request for funds is that it gives Richardson a legal mechanism to tie the Panthers to Charlotte for the life of the taxpayer's funding in the likely case he dies soon and the team is sold to a new owner (Richardson seems to have given up on passing the team to his sons, who feuded in their earlier tenures with the franchise.) He wants the team to stay in Carolina, and getting the city and state to kickback a hundred million compared to their estimated $800 million in tax revenue the team has generated in its tenure is not anywhere near as dastardly as the con job pulled on the Minnesota taxpayers over the Vikings potential move to LA.

6.) The lockout wasn't about teams running into the red. They absolutely played poverty-stricken and milked the sob story, but it wasn't about losing money. It was about the fact that the NFL is about to reach it's saturation point in the U.S. market and teams are no longer guaranteed ever-increasing revenues at the rates they had been achieving them through the 90s and 2000s. The CBA as written before depended on ever-climbing salary caps, and the league was about to hit a period where there weren't going to be any for a while. So, the owners and the players bitched about it all for a while, and that was that. The owners came out on the sweet end of the deal, if only because the slow return from the recession will make the austerity level revenue numbers they were turning during the lockout evolve into extremely healthy profits. However, the new salary cap floor will likely stunt profit growths as well.

If anyone actually gave a good goddamn about what the fug these numbers meant it wouldn't be a story, but it's Deadspin so, whatever.


That's a cool story bro. But, I think the real story is the fact that Richardson was poor-mouthing at the time---using any means necessary (including stretching the truth) to ****** back some of that pie out of the mouths of players across the league. I am not saying that this is necessary evil, per se, but it is indicative of a culture that in many ways has gone awry (and I'll just leave that at that).

People keep talking about profit-sharing as if it is just an ancillary part of the deal, but it's really the part that makes the NFL such a sweet deal. If you fug up at making money as an NFL owner, then you're an idiot. That being said, most of the owners are (or have been) great businessmen and, indeed, have their other primary and traditional business concerns. In my opinion, the primary concern for owning an NFL franchise should be to win, period, not to rely on it as your traditional means of earning a living, because it isn't a traditional business. The irony is that if you do win, the money is going to come regardless. Hell, with all the revenue sharing (as you can see) the money is going to come even if you don't win. But, the more you win, the more "bonus" money that you and your cronies can personally pocket whether it be a few millions, or tens of millions (not to mention that the entire organization is developing exponential equity over time).

Lastly, as an NFL owner you get all the other perks, benefits, and largely goodwill from the surrounding community if you just act like you half-way know what you're doing and act like a winning product on the field is your priority.

Poor Jerry...Gimme a break!

#23 h0llywood

h0llywood

    I HATE LUKE KUECHLY!

  • ALL-PRO
  • 2,633 posts
  • LocationPasadena, CA

Posted 08 March 2013 - 09:47 AM

My opinion of JR has pointed up even more so after this Deadspin story. Deadspin looking for another Lenay Kekua, they're not going to find it in the Panthers.

#24 pantherclaw

pantherclaw

    Wise Ass

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,814 posts
  • LocationGalveston

Posted 08 March 2013 - 09:54 AM

Will say this, the last two days sure has shown who the pissy ass bitches are.

#25 top dawg

top dawg

    The Creative Cat

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,732 posts
  • LocationWITHIN MY MIND'S EYE

Posted 08 March 2013 - 09:54 AM

You ******** out S_N _A _T_ C_H, but not vagina? LMFAO

#26 Panthro

Panthro

    aka Pablo

  • Moderators
  • 24,328 posts

Posted 08 March 2013 - 09:55 AM

http://www.newsobser...s-panthers.html

Short answer is no. And technically the team doesn't even have to move cities. Just building a new stadium would technically void any PSL as they are tied to the stadium and not the team.

Thanks.Just curious if PSL owners would be reimbursed or transferred

#27 Panthro

Panthro

    aka Pablo

  • Moderators
  • 24,328 posts

Posted 08 March 2013 - 09:57 AM

Will say this, the last two days sure has shown who the pissy ass bitches are.

Feel like you have some good company for the first time?

#28 Floppin

Floppin

    Smooches

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,734 posts
  • LocationShallotte, NC

Posted 08 March 2013 - 09:57 AM

Thanks.Just curious if PSL owners would be reimbursed or transferred


As I said, no. There is no contractual obligation for the Panthers to do so. Any reimbursement or transfer would quite literally be a gift from the Panthers.

#29 pantherclaw

pantherclaw

    Wise Ass

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,814 posts
  • LocationGalveston

Posted 08 March 2013 - 10:02 AM

Feel like you have some good company for the first time?

says one that.has been rattling his sabre and leading a.lot.of the bs.

You never let us down. ;-)

#30 iampantherman

iampantherman

    Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 317 posts

Posted 08 March 2013 - 10:09 AM

Actually, while I won't claim to be an expert by any means, I do have some accounting experience.

4) I don't think most people begrudge the owners for making money. The trouble is if you tell me you have 200 million dollars in negative cash flow, and you're actually up conservatively 30 million. That's a lot of horse poo to swallow. Add that on top of owners holding cities hostage for free tax payer money, and it gets annoying. Lot's not even mention the product on the field for the past few years.

5) It's hypocritical in the extreme. How often has JR flaunted his privately funded stadium? And Debt can actually help improve financial returns if managed properly because interest functions as a tax shield. There are other ways to ensure the franchise stays in Carolina besides holding the city hostage.


This.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com