Forbes estimates the newest value of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers to be somewhere around $1.51 billion - a 23% increase in just the last year - yet, just 24th in the NFL. Of course, NFL TV revenues are the biggest factor in the Glazers' ever-increasing fortunes.
The only bad financial news for Glazers these days is the Cowboys are now worth an estimated $4 billion, continuing to put some distance between Dallas and the Glazers' other investment, Manchester United, most-recently estimated at $3.1 billion.
Is that why
Unlikely. Man U returns to the Champions League next year, and that's expected to boost in revenues by an additional $60 million. And personally, if I had the chance to cash in $400 million of my investments right now, I would too.
So times are good for the Glazers, who:
- Already have the sweetest stadium deal in Tampa Bay;
- Are bringing in $55 million a year in Buccaneers operating incomes; and
- Continue to squeeze Hillsborough Co. taxpayers for every last penny in stadium upgrade negotiations.
FOLLOW: Shadow of the Stadium on Twitter
FOLLOW: Shadow of the Stadium on Facebook
I agree that with sports team value that are increasing at a phenomenal rate (38% in the NFL in just 12 months), it make less and less sense for them to ask for public funds for stadiums or related assets.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2015/09/14/the-most-valuable-teams-in-the-nfl/
I believe that governments (cities, states/provinces, country) must always use a ROI approach before investing/allocating funds or money for sports team facilities or any other events/organisations (cultural, festivals, ...).
No matter what are the funding mechanisms used (loan with low or 0% interest rates, free or inexpensive land price, infrastructure funding on the site or around the site, immigrants/investors program, taxes on hotel room or tickets, tourists program funds, income tax on salary, subsidies, ...), if the investment is profitable for the community and bring value, then it make sense to move forward and work with the teams owners.
What is interesting here in this whole topic and debate is that some regions have low income tax, low sales taxes and teams are asking for money.
On the other hand, when you have regions with high income tax (for enterprises and individuals) and sales taxes, it make more sense for a sport team to ask for funding considering all the money those governments are making with their taxes.
So this is where I sometimes think that governments must be more involved with sports team but with an ROI mindset and a clear understanding of the profitability of those sports teams.
Just posted a long and interesting comment and after publishing it, it disappear. This blog software/technology need to be revised.
ReplyDeleteand yet they won't pay for some of the cost of a practice facility & some better score boards... If only we had Shad Khan or Jerry Jones for an owner...
ReplyDeleteThey have 100 times more revenue than the Culverhouse's, and yet, the team still sucks. That's because the actual "winning" of the game is as afterthought. With the influx of fantasy football, draft kings, et al., the main focus revolves around increasing revenue. No need to win anymore.
ReplyDeleteDon't you feel sorry for the Glazers? The value of their NFL team, the worst performing one of all 32 last year, has increased in value by 23% in one year. Last year the Bucs regular season home games averaged 60,000 in attendance with actually 50,000 showing up to pay to park, buy beer, soda, hot dogs, Josh McCown shirts, etc. This year, for their home opener, they sold out with 57,000 actually showing up!
ReplyDeleteImagine how much richer they would be if the Bucs had actually won 5 or 6 games last year, instead of 2!