Trillium Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 From Goal.com Toronto FC enjoyed the splashiest of the winter spending sprees, spending a reported $100 million on Jermain Defoe and Michael Bradley, while also adding Brazilian forward Gilberto, former FC Dallas midfielder Jackson Goncalves, former San Jose left back Justin Morrow and Blackburn right back Bradley Orr. Those half-dozen players won’t guarantee the team its first playoff berth in team history, but it should ensure that TFC will have its strongest team ever, and one that should at least compete seriously for a playoff place. So 100 million bucks devided by 21,140 seats = $4,730.00 dollars per seat. If the players average life on the squad is five years ( best case scenario ) to pay off the investment TFC needs to earn $946.00 more per seat, with 18 home games per season it means a price increase of $52.00 per seat ... is this achievable or is TFC hoping to garner other significant revenue streams in the current sized stadia ? How many Dafoe/Bradley jerseys can be sold ? Even if they get a bump of 10,000 extra seats will it pay off over five years of revenue ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFC07 Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 Short answer: Yes! Also remember MLS pay for transfer fee for Bradley (not sure how much they contribute) as well. Winning TFC brings a lot more games (playoffs, CCL etc) which will result in more revenue from gate alone. Also ticket prices already went up and they're except to make a profit in 3 years time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob.notenboom Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 If memory serves, a beer at BMO is $12 ($10 profit) so that's only 10 million beer … in the black by the start of June. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamboAl Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 Quick answer is yes-it's MLSE and they can afford it. And Leiweke has already stated that this is not a money making proposition cause it ain't...it's about getting the pieces to win. Frankly, the supporters deserve this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youllneverwalkalone Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 I could be wrong, but I don't think Bradley and Defoe will make much difference to league revenues either. Even with Beckham, the league couldn't get a decent TV deal. I can't imagine anyone tuning in to watch Michael Bradley. Even if they are Harry Potter fans, they likely want to watch his dad. Defoe might attract the odd away supporter live. It will be interesting to see if TFC's away attendance goes up at all. Overall, I think this was a bad piece of business for the league whether MLSE can afford it or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shamrock Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 A club shouldn't be financially dependant on supporters in the stadium. A solid club depends on sponsorship and a TV-deal. While the TV-deal isn't all that in Canada at this moment of time, in sponsorship (boarding, luxury boxes, shirts-sponsors, etc) TFC and other MLS-clubs still have a lot to gain. These moves weren't financial, but sportive. Gaining some of the credit back that they've lost over the years. And MLSE has enough money. Since they are in several sporting franchises they have the option of investing more in one instead of the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youllneverwalkalone Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 But even if TFC truly become the first $50m revenue club in MLS (which is unlikely as the Sounders are almost there last season and the Canadian dollar is falling) they are allocating more than 40% of that to two players. Two players who likely do very little for revenues in the rest of the league. Ignoring the financial side, it's hard again to say that these move are "sportive" for the league as a whole. Paying Michael Bradley 5x his market value seems ridiculous when you could attract 3-5 star attacking players for that kind of money. Wait a year and increase the cap for everyone, or add more DP slots, or whatever you need to do. It was already a challenge to bring back Maurice Edu after the Bradley contract, wait till you try to bring another international in their prime who can actually sell tickets/earn tv contracts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elmateo Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 It is about business - MLSE has deep pockets with Bell and Rogers but they are trying to remake the sports culture in Toronto/Canada so that they can continue to make money off of their sports platforms Sportsnet and TSN. A shift towards soccer is a big deal for these companies as it is the world's largest television market. Big owners are going to be projecting farther into the future. Gate revenues are a big part of the income of every sports team - though it varies. For large European clubs gate is between 15 and 40% http://swissramble.blogspot.ca/ . The moves are going to be a mixture of 'sportive' and for the business model because the business model is sports and being 'successful' on the field is one way to gain loyal support (customers), though as the leafs show not the only way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJB Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 Well, buying the Argos and moving them to BMO Field will help to pay for some of those new players. So much for listening to supporters. http://www.tsn.ca/cfl/story/?id=442375 Being sold to Tanenbaum or MLSE would make the Argos part of the plan for a redesigned BMO Field, thus solving their need to build a new home from scratch when they vacate Rogers Centre after the 2017 season. MLSE president and CEO Tim Lieweke has stated several times in recent months that the Argos could factor into future plans at BMO, a position in stark contrast to that of his predecessors, who saw the facility as soccer-only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keegan Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 Well, buying the Argos and moving them to BMO Field will help to pay for some of those new players. So much for listening to supporters. http://www.tsn.ca/cfl/story/?id=442375 Being sold to Tanenbaum or MLSE would make the Argos part of the plan for a redesigned BMO Field, thus solving their need to build a new home from scratch when they vacate Rogers Centre after the 2017 season. MLSE president and CEO Tim Lieweke has stated several times in recent months that the Argos could factor into future plans at BMO, a position in stark contrast to that of his predecessors, who saw the facility as soccer-only. I already said that these signings were compensation for the Argos to BMO. But how does PURCHASING a team that LOSES MONEY every year help pay for these signings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackdude Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 I already said that these signings were compensation for the Argos to BMO. But how does PURCHASING a team that LOSES MONEY every year help pay for these signings? Because they would own the stadium? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.