from Amazon
Monday, December 12, 2011
What is Ozanian of Forbes saying here?
I’m confused:
The average NHL team is worth 47 per cent more than it was before the lockout that cancelled the 2004-05 season. Let’s hope a the NHL can get a more economically sound CBA without having another work stoppage. Business has improved too much the past seven years.
How does the bold part make any sense? Team values jumped. Business has been great. And they still need a “more economically sound” CBA? Elsewhere in the article he talks about needing to get into NBA-style splits:
The NHL must move much closer to the 48 per cent model the NFL agreed to before this season or the 50-50 revenue split National Basketball Association owners and players recently agreed to.
Must?
He talks about some teams not being profitable, while completely ignoring that teams can share revenue among themselves to make up for the haves doing so well. That the players should have the onus.
It’s quite the striking read, that it lays out the facts as he did, and then ignores those facts in favor of a political argument.
Valuations are based on expected prospects: those team valuations will be based on expected income under the next CBA. His core argument is that league-wide margins have fallen - 21% in 2010-11 year-on-year - and that falling margins with increasing revenue is a sign of an excessive cost base.
If there is an expectation that the next CBA will be more favorable to ownership, then that will increase team valuations.