Yup, doesn't help with the growth does it?

The Leafs are very much a regional team but have built up millions of fans over the years and are a veritable cash cow, I think TFC's growth will continue just fine...

Forbes is welcome to its "estimates", but MLS teams have self-interested reasons to downplay revenues and profits (player salary negotiations). That's why the league officially has a $3.5 million salary cap yet teams continue to spend millions more (TFC around $25 million). Next year, teams have an extra and "optional" $4 million in targeted allocation money to spend and MLSE have enthusiastically stated they will spend every penny of it (out of their own pockets) despite already having the most stacked squad in the league. Think about that for a second, and let it digest. They don't need to invest more to win the league, but they're spending as much as they're allowed to spend. If you also consider the millions they'll be spending to expand the stadium further, it's clear they're all too happy to invest in this product. Infact, they're one of the ownership groups that have been lobbying to increase league spending limits further. TFC is bringing in the cash, but they have to play a double game when negotiating with player's unions.

The Leafs are a regional team now, but up until the seventies they were English Canada's only professional hockey team. Not disagreeing that TFC will continue to grow, but I don't think the growth of the Leafs is comparable. There's a unique dynamic to the Leafs (and Canadiens, I suppose) which no other sports team in this country is ever going to have.

Seriously? That's like saying ManU is a regional team.

del

I'm confused, how come Forbes "estimates" are just great when they state TFC's supposed sale value but not so great when stating losses.

del

Yup, and I barely watch hockey anymore but there's no denying their being iconic.

So why do we keep hearing people across Canada complaining about their exposure on TV? You're telling me most of their merchandise sales and ticket holders are outside Ontario? My observation is that most of the people attending their games reside in Southern Ontario, and even in their home province there are regions where other teams have a stronger following (Windsor: Detroit Red Wings, Ottawa: Senators, Eastern Ontario: Montreal Canadiens). Sounds like most of their fans and revenue come from Southern Ontario to me. The ManU/ManCity/RM/Barcelona's of this world are a bad example as they're in the two most popular global leagues, with several times more people watching them outside their home countries than within. The NHL and MLS don't have that kind of voluntary exposure.

That's interesting. I wonder why other teams and other leagues don't do the same then? Everybody loves a bargain, right?

I don't see why this would be unique to MLS and that somehow they're all raking in tons of revenue way above their expenses, and that somehow this couldn't also apply in other sports as well.

My sense is that it is simply a reflection that most MLS clubs have owners with deep pockets that can absorb these losses as an investment in the future that will eventually pay off.

In most cities (including Toronto for sure) this is probably a pretty sure bet, as the popularity of soccer and of the local club(s) is unlikely to go anywhere but up.

Yes, the lengths that some people will go to are astonishing.

NBA is a sport that's very popular with young people and their ratings are fine.

Nobody is going to forsake watching a sport they like because it's on "TV" and they "don't watch TV".

That's BS.

My kids are teens and they and all their friends watch programming on multiple platforms, including traditional TV.

I'd wager there aren't that many people who don't watch any "TV" at all.

We have no idea what people mean when they say they don't watch TV. In my case, if I say I don't watch TV it might mean regular mainstream TV programming like Big Bang Theory and The Amazing Race. So if that's your measure, then sure - I don't watch TV.

I also don't think anyone has mentioned that sports broadcasting (where on TV, radio or online) is all about advertising dollars. If there are millions of eyeballs tuning in online then the MLS people know and so do their advertisers (actual and potential).

And if they aren't screaming from the rooftops that their live streaming numbers are fantastic, it's probably because they aren't.

It's definitely a phenomenon particular to MLS at this stage of its evolution. There may be other examples that I'm not aware of, but I have studied the league's business model in detail, which is why I can tell whose done their homework and whose just talking out of their posterior.

This is a really involved topic, and I'm not really interested in writing another essay, so I'll just outline the gist of it: North American sports culture values relative parity and financial stability (particularly after the NASL experience in the 70's).

MLS uses a salary cap (a rarity in the soccer world), and a conservative one at that. I won't get too much into the mechanics of this, but let's just say that a team can have zero eyeballs watching them and zero bums in seats and still make millions in profit. Not to mention selling the franchise rights for a pretty penny, should they wish to go down that rout. Of course, an owner who runs a club in that way would get a refund and get voted out of the league. MLS owners are some of the richest in all of sports, and these smart people are not investing to lose money. There are several billionaires with no soccer background who are competing amongst themselves to secure limited new franchise spots.

The league is still very young, and while it has stimulated the development of young local players, as the league expands into new markets the quality of the talent pool at the lower end stays constant, as the development of quality player's is balanced out by the addition of other local players via dilution. Simultaneously, as more markets, more ticket sales and more sponsorship dollars enter the fray, along with more world class players willing to play here (initially the older stars, now young talents in their prime years), revenues particularly in the larger markets, have gone up considerably. Therein lies the dilemma.

While the quality of the local talent pool has remained constant, due to the above reasons, the quality and quantity of international talent entering the league has exploded, particularly in the last 3 years. While these international players are getting market wages commensurate with their talent level, local journeyman players have a majority say in contract and salary negotiations (since they are the bulk of player's union members). If the salary cap goes up, the players can demand higher wages way above market rates by virtue of being on the same team as more talented players, hence the need for calculated systems such as GAM and TAM to manage salaries. In other leagues, it's quite straightforward, you play better, you get higher wages, and since everyone is at the same talent level, the top players may make only a million or so more than the worst starter. In MLS, the top players may make $7 million while another starter may only make as little as $150,000. With such a disparity, unions can demand a greater share of profits or go on strike. Thus, high revenue ownership groups with large disparities in wages soak up their extra profits on investments such as modernized training facilities, amortized stadium modernization/expansion costs, etc. Basically, anything to avoid a strike. The player's union in turn satisfies itself with minor bumps in salary and contract flexibility as they too are aware of current limitations as well as long-term opportunities. Once revenues and talent levels reach a certain point (a top 5 league, probably in 10 years tops), they won't have to worry about overpaying for local talent as they'll be able to manage world class teams that are well paid top to bottom. The main priority right now though is to build increasingly talented teams with quality infrastructure, revenue sources and fan support..

TFC have the highest payroll in MLS. They can remove two players and be in the black. $9M deficit isn't much to shrug at if the franchise valuation is increasing 20% YOY

This is particularly why the creation of the CPL is vital to Canadian soccer. There aren't any MLS fans in the outlying regions but there are definitely soccer fans, and CPL will eventually begin to fill in those regions not touched by MLS.

The Leafs are absolutely most definitely not just regional. Saturday night,. every, single, Saturday. For as long as I can remember, the Leafs have the early game. At least 95% of the time anyway (not every Saturday of course)... not to mention, games I've attended in Calgary and Edmonton when the leafs come to town a significant portion of the crowd is cheering for the Leafs.

TSN and Sportnet cover absolutely everything Leafs. Being in the West, to me, gets so annoying.

Someone is still drunk from the TFC celebrations :haha::haha::haha::haha:

It's actually quite compelling to think that the Argos are now all of a sudden the 2nd most watched MLSE team, per game. Without the multi million dollar salaries. Get 20k-25k in attendance and it seems to become a really valuable asset, even if it's just for the optics of a successful, storied, Canadian franchise.

So what you guys are telling me is that contrary to 99% of sports threads on this forum and what people say publicy, the Leafs are not being force-fed down Canada's throat by the Toronto media, but are actually popular in places like Edmonton and and Calgary. Thanks, now I have more ammunition for my regional chauvinism and will promptly tell everyone complaining about the Leafs over-exposure to STFU and give them the link to this thread. Thank you all for the great service you have rendered to the Center of the Universe! :diablo:

Whooooose your daddyyyy??!!! :P

I tend to agree with this.