Yohan Posted November 20, 2013 Share Posted November 20, 2013 http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissmith/2013/11/20/major-league-soccers-most-valuable-teams/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissmith/2013/11/20/major-league-soccers-billionaire-owners/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissmith/2013/11/20/major-league-soccers-stadium-revolution/ Team Value ($M) Revenue ($M) Operating Income ($M) Seattle Sounders 175 48.0 18.2 LA Galaxy 170 44.0 7.8 Portland Timbers 141 39.1 9.4 Houston Dynamo 125 32.6 8.2 Toronto FC 121 30.9 4.5 New York Red Bulls 114 28.1 -6.3 Sporting Kansas City 108 27.7 5.1 Chicago Fire 102 24.5 -3.2 FC Dallas 97 24.2 0.6 Montreal Impact 96 26.2 3.4 Philadelphia Union 90 21.4 1.1 New England Revolution 89 17.1 2.6 Vancouver Whitecaps 86 23.0 0.0 Real Salt Lake 85 23.0 -0.1 Colorado Rapids 76 18.1 -2.9 San Jose Earthquakes 75 15.0 -4.5 Columbus Crew 73 18.6 -1.6 DC United 71 17.7 -2.8 Chivas USA 64 15.0 -5.5 10 teams making a profit, 7 losing money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFC07 Posted November 20, 2013 Share Posted November 20, 2013 Is TFC still making money? Not only that, but making more money than Montreal and Vancouver? lol TFC is top 5 most valuable club in MLS? Shows you strength of Toronto market. Just imagine if we had a winning team how much more valuable TFC will be in the league? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keegan Posted November 20, 2013 Share Posted November 20, 2013 How is Houston #4? They have a great stadium and team but their support isn't all that great from what I've seen on TV. Not that support is everything but it's definitely a strong indicator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFC07 Posted November 20, 2013 Share Posted November 20, 2013 How is Houston #4? They have a great stadium and team but their support isn't all that great from what I've seen on TV. Not that support is everything but it's definitely a strong indicator. They own their stadium, so they profit from everything being held there (like high school football to concerts). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Crampton Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 They own their stadium, so they profit from everything being held there (like high school football to concerts). Pretty sure that the Dynamo don't actually own the stadium themselves. They share with a college football team and that was part of the deal that got it built. Wiki lists their municipal sports authority as the owner and AEG, part owner of the Dynamo, as operator so it sounds like a Toronto style arrangement. I don't imagine Forbes would be booking revenue from ancillaries to the Dynamo in their estimates. To Keegan's point, the Dynamo do well on attendance: 6th highest average this year, in a down year, from what I can tell. It points to why you shouldn't judge that sort of thing from television (where the capacity of the venue effects perception). Also, I suspect that Canadians typical underweight Houston as a city in their mental picture of "big cities" in North America; it has a metro population comparable to Toronto. Consequently, there are probably ample opportunities for sponsorship. My confused, maybe concerned, question is about Vancouver. Revenue of only $23mil and break-even economics with one of the highest attendances in the league (and the "new" team halo only starting to peter out)? I don't think the 'Caps are going anywhere but that's not as strong a base as I'd prefer. All things considered it probably points to how lucky we are to have three Canadian teams in MLS and why there's no NBA or MLB team there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFC07 Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 Vancouver needs their own stadium so they can get more revenue so they can make a profit. Montreal should be more concern if their team starts losing. Toronto is doing fine, but I expect they will take a loss once they start construction on BMO field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpg75 Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 The team valuations seemed to be based on a Price to Revenue ratio of between 4:1 and 5:1. Seattle is a great deal if they can keep those revenues going, they have the 3rd highest expenses behind LA and NY but made an exorbitant 18M in profit to give them just under 10:1 Price to Earnings. Portland and Houston are also good deals with roughly 15:1 P:E ratios. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macksam Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 My confused, maybe concerned, question is about Vancouver. Revenue of only $23mil and break-even economics with one of the highest attendances in the league (and the "new" team halo only starting to peter out)? I don't think the 'Caps are going anywhere but that's not as strong a base as I'd prefer. All things considered it probably points to how lucky we are to have three Canadian teams in MLS and why there's no NBA or MLB team there. Like TFC07 is alluding to, I think the biggest thing for Vancouver is not owning or operating BC Place. The support is clearly there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.