DavidHasselhoffsFist
Seen some dark places, but always pop back out!
- May 9, 2010
- 1,308
- 1,477
The day the music died
- Thread starter Fourier
- Start date
Fourier
Registered User
Lets say that I give you that the salaries were $3M. It still does not change my core point. The in-game revenues alone would have been far higher than that. At an average ticket price of $10 per ticket, which is probably a little on the low side, ticket sales alone would have been $8.5M. That does not include in-game merchandise, sponsorship or concession revenues or any of the smaller but still not insignificant box seat revenues, nor any playoff games. The economy in Edmonton was not great in the early 80's but support for both the Oilers and the Eskimos did not suffer because of it.
What made the NHL infeasible in Edmonton were the skyrocketing salaries of the very late 80's and early to mid 90's, triggered in no small part by the Gretzky sale, being compounded by a big drop in enthusiasm for the team after Pocklington started to both exploit STH'ers and sell off his assets. The former may have happened anyway, and perhaps by the early 90's things may not have been much better anyway. But the latter could have been avoided had Pocklington kept the team together for at least a few more years. But he was bleeding the team to finance his other ventures. His big ATB loan was not to operate the Oilers.
Drivesaitl
Finding Hemingway
Keeping in mind in the 80's very f ew fans were buying such things as Jerseys or other team memorabilia. It just wasn't a revenue stream back then. I don't think Jersey sales really took off until about a decade later. Concessions wasn't the money leader either that it is now. Back then the concessions and profit margin on them was more reasonable. A big thing to consider back then is that there were zero Alcohol sales at games in Province of Alberta. So that merchandise and concessions weren't bringing in that much and also at that time it wasn't meals being provided. It was just typical boring concession fare. Not too good or too popular. Rubber hot dogs that were disgusting was the common comment. Keep in mind also that earlier than expected playoff exits in 82, and 86 would have cut into revenues as well.
Additionally with the digging I did for last post and knowing when first big contracts came up your figure for 87 of 5M cap is likely off as well.
But what I hadn't heard from you yet is operations and expenses side. Can't just look at one without the other. In the 80's it was generally accepted that an NHL team was a really poor investment, it was a labor of love.
The NHL was rarely a profitable business at all back then. Several books, articles have expanded on this through the years. This article is interesting and supports the view that profits weren't had under Eagleson and Zeigler and that the WHA had wrecked the NHL ledgers for quite a while.
How the NHL Grew Up | Literary Review of Canada
Gary Bettman and I were comparing fitness notes one day in Toronto in the early 1990s, just after he had been picked as the National Hockey League’s first commissioner. I told him I ran about an hour a day, maybe four times a week. “With hills?” he asked, eyes alight, hoping for the correct...
reviewcanada.ca
That there was relocations, revenue sharing and bail outs in place also points to teams not being profitable.
This article, and I'm sorry, blows a lot of what you've postulated out of the water:
1991, According to Zeigler, who would know, a full 2/3 of NHL revenues came from gate, from ticket sales. Some teams had added revenue from Luxury Suites but Oilers didn't.
Zeigler also claiming at the time that 3-4 teams were losing money and a full dozen teams were "right on the cusp". At the time thats the vast majority of NHL clubs NOT making money.
Next Zeigler saying that NHL total revenues were only 400M and this including all gate, Network contracts and even local TV contracts.
Finally Zeigler spills the beans that the profit was only 15M league wide. A pittance. Really not even what could be considered a return on investment.
Last edited:
This was me a few days ago. What's up with the wasps this summer.
Drivesaitl
Finding Hemingway
Very spot specific and depending where you live. If you have an idiot neighbor that allows complete wasp nests to grow all around their property then you have a problem. its very localized like that with wasps. This year for some reason the Bee's have won out over the wasps. We've been able to eat outside most nights on the deck. Still, at a Tim Hortons blocks away we couldn't even drink and Ice Cap outside.
It should be a big wasp year with the dry and heat. But where we are hasn't been. No mosquitos around yard or deck either. Been nice that way.
Don't wasps usually get more pronounced in August and early sept?
I’m not sure what you’re talking about.
The fact is that Wayne Gretzky was not sold over Gretzky wanting more money that Pocklington couldn’t afford. He was sold to finance Pocklington’s other failing business enterprises.
Pocklington was not selling the team at that time as it was financing his other enterprises. So why would other people step up to pay Pocklingtons employee?
He only wanted to sell it when it stopped making him a shit ton of money in a progressively more financially unbalanced league that required several lockouts, a wasted season and a salary cap to bring into balance.
This is a puzzling take as well as being factually incorrect.
Pocklimgton did sell Gretzky.
But I read a few things about the old oilers that talked about statements of Wayne wondering at times how it would have been without all the stars, or in a different location.
Even the idea of how Wayne would have been had he played in baseball instead of hockey. Doubtful he would have done a move like that as there had never been a michael Jordan precident of changing leagues yet. So that may be a bit of future events rewriting possible past outcomes.
But outside of his marriage, and things there had been rumours. Would Wayne stay when the oilers started to have more and more stars leave. They had to keep kurri for sure, but the all star drain had already begun at this point.
But I read a few things about the old oilers that talked about statements of Wayne wondering at times how it would have been without all the stars, or in a different location.
Even the idea of how Wayne would have been had he played in baseball instead of hockey. Doubtful he would have done a move like that as there had never been a michael Jordan precident of changing leagues yet. So that may be a bit of future events rewriting possible past outcomes.
But outside of his marriage, and things there had been rumours. Would Wayne stay when the oilers started to have more and more stars leave. They had to keep kurri for sure, but the all star drain had already begun at this point.
Drivesaitl
Finding Hemingway
Read the last several posts. I've substantiated everything already. The Oilers were not making significant coin in 80's and neither was the NHL. Its a convenient narrative, that is wrong, to blame Puck for everything that happened.
Yes Puck had other failing or non profitable enterprizes. But the Oilers weren't making much profit either.
In anycase I can't blame a guy totally for selling out when the NHL was a financial shitshow by say 1990 with almost all teams losing money or on the cusp. The NHL wasn't a profitable business back then.
Sorry Pocklington was a class A asshat who was using the Oilers revenues and its assets (ie players) to fund his failing business enterprises.
The NHL was highly profitable in certain markets (Toronto, New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Montreal, Edmonton to name a few). In the 80’s the Oilers were profitable, enabled by countless Cup runs.
They ceased being profitable in the 90’s brought on by a massive imbalance in economics and a failing Canadian dollar. Only then did the bearded prick sellout, and it was originally to a guy who was moving the team to Houston, because he was no longer making money on the team and had sold off its most profitable assets. It was now a liability to him.
So I don’t blame him for selling but let’s not pretend he was not part of the problem that created the imbalance. The sale of Gretzky opened many non traditional U.S. markets to the NHL, directly because of Pocklington.
Thankfully the EIG came along and saved the team.
Fourier
Registered User
There is a big difference between the early 80's or even say 1987 and the early 90's in terms of profitability for teams in the NHL. It was in the early 90's that salaries exploded while ticket prices did not. We seem to agree that salaries, by far the major expense for the Oilers in 1982, were no more than $3M. As I have already said the basic ticket revenues would have been three times this number. I agree that other revenue streams were significantly less significant than they are now but teams were not billion dollar businesses back then. Profits in the 5-10 million range or maybe even more, were meaningful. The team paid all of $7.5M to enter the league. In terms of ROI, the Oilers were a great investment for him early on.Keeping in mind in the 80's very f ew fans were buying such things as Jerseys or other team memorabilia. It just wasn't a revenue stream back then. I don't think Jersey sales really took off until about a decade later. Concessions wasn't the money leader either that it is now. Back then the concessions and profit margin on them was more reasonable. A big thing to consider back then is that there were zero Alcohol sales at games in Province of Alberta. So that merchandise and concessions weren't bringing in that much and also at that time it wasn't meals being provided. It was just typical boring concession fare. Not too good or too popular. Rubber hot dogs that were disgusting was the common comment. Keep in mind also that earlier than expected playoff exits in 82, and 86 would have cut into revenues as well.
Additionally with the digging I did for last post and knowing when first big contracts came up your figure for 87 of 5M cap is likely off as well.
But what I hadn't heard from you yet is operations and expenses side. Can't just look at one without the other. In the 80's it was generally accepted that an NHL team was a really poor investment, it was a labor of love.
The NHL was rarely a profitable business at all back then. Several books, articles have expanded on this through the years. This article is interesting and supports the view that profits weren't had under Eagleson and Zeigler and that the WHA had wrecked the NHL ledgers for quite a while.
How the NHL Grew Up | Literary Review of Canada
Gary Bettman and I were comparing fitness notes one day in Toronto in the early 1990s, just after he had been picked as the National Hockey League’s first commissioner. I told him I ran about an hour a day, maybe four times a week. “With hills?” he asked, eyes alight, hoping for the correct...
That there was relocations, revenue sharing and bail outs in place also points to teams not being profitable.
This article, and I'm sorry, blows a lot of what you've postulated out of the water:
1991, According to Zeigler, who would know, a full 2/3 of NHL revenues came from gate, from ticket sales. Some teams had added revenue from Luxury Suites but Oilers didn't.
Zeigler also claiming at the time that 3-4 teams were losing money and a full dozen teams were "right on the cusp". At the time thats the vast majority of NHL clubs NOT making money.
Next Zeigler saying that NHL total revenues were only 400M and this including all gate, Network contracts and even local TV contracts.
Finally Zeigler spills the beans that the profit was only 15M league wide. A pittance. Really not even what could be considered a return on investment.
Pocklington used the Oilers to finance most of his empire in the 80's. This blew up on him once the golden goose was no longer laying eggs.
You're right, it is the dry weather. It's also been a record year for aphids for that reason, as I understand. Thankfully the wasps I'm encountering aren't aggressive. But on that note, I've been seeing a decent amount of hornets this year too, and it's been ages since I've seen one of those in Edmonton.
Drivesaitl
Finding Hemingway
Thanks for not reading anything I stated despite my digging and doing the work. OK. Puck was a grade A asshat. I'm not defending him, I'm invoking that a lot of other variables existed, the Alberta economy 80's collapse, the world economy collapse and market collapse of 87/ 88, and the fact that the NHL wasn't a profitable business at the time.
The NHL was NOT Highly profitable in Edmonton. It was in Toronto, NY, Chicago, Montreal. It wasn't in Philly either.
I'd actually provided a citation from John Zeigler who was running the NHL that 4 teams were losing money and a dozen were on the cusp of it. That was in 91, only a couple seasons after Gretz was traded. There were only 21 teams so only 5 were being profitable.
The Oilers were among front runners in attendance but not close to it in gate. The Oilers didn't have luxury boxes and luxury seating like the big teams did. They didn't have the same ticket prices either. For instance if a Rangers ticket is 15bucks in 1982 that is USD. If the Oilers ticket price is 10bucks thats in Cad. Not close to the same.
Last edited:
I dont care what you Googled and I said the NHL were losing money in the 90s. 1991 is in the 90s. That was when things really cratered and when Pocklington started to look at selling as the team became a liability.
Yes things were on a downward spiral from 87 on however for most of the 80s the Oilers were profitable and by NHL standards at the time, which was peanuts, but doing well enough thanks to multiple cup runs, 5 in total up to 1988 including the loss to the Islanders, to help finance his failing business enterprises. This is absolute fact that he was financing his other business enterprises with the Oilers revenue and through the sale of players such as Gretzky.
I have seen the actual P&L's and balance sheets when I met with Cal Nichols. I am not sure you have.
Drivesaitl
Finding Hemingway
We'll agree to disagree but I will point out two other things that have not as yet been in the discussion. Yeah, the Oilers and the other 4 WHA merger clubs had to pay a 6M entrance fee and to pay out the dissolution of the two other remaining WHA teams who were not accepted in the merger. So the outlay was 8M. Sure not much in relation to todays Entrance fees but was still an expense incurred by Puck. In addition, and you probably forget this, is a stipulation of the Merger was that the Oilers would not receive any share in TV Revenues for first 3 seasons. None. Not even local.
Again theres zero substantiation for your clam the Oilers were making 5-10M in profits per year.
Please tell us you were on the Moon with Neil Armstrong as well.
No I didn't have Soirees with Cal Nichols. Since you claim seeing the balance sheets what were the profits?
For sure during the cup years there was some ROI. I don't dispute that. But I dispute it being very much. Also in view of initial investment and outlay its not huge ROI. At the time couldn't even be considered a good investment.
Last edited:
Please tell us you were on the Moon with Neil Armstrong as well.
No I was much too young for that. But did meet with Cal, my father, and one other gentleman when the EIG were putting the investment team together. Cal and I were working on another deal at the same time. We decided not to invest but saw the complete financials along with 5 year projections the EIG had and the estimates with and without a salary cap.
Cal saved the team from PP who was just using the team as a financial machine until he couldn't anymore, and then it became useless to him.
Drivesaitl
Finding Hemingway
Thanks for the info. I was ribbing you ftr.
Bare with me on this though. Cal Nichols and the EIG had immense difficulties getting co-owners or investors to buy in. I was around at the time too. Stories were constant how hard it was and Cal and others had to dig deep into their rolodex to find anybody willing. If the Oilers were making some kind of good ROI under Puck then one figures it would be attractive. It wasn't.
Couldn't it just be that Puck when he sold Gretz and later ended up selling the team was just reading the tea leaves and that he was 100% correct? Guy was an ASS, but he wasn't in this to hang onto another bleeder. He couldn't afford it either.
Lets also keep in mind that only 2years elapsed from the sale of Gretz for the 88-89 season and the Zeigler 91 comments that the NHL was not making money. That isn't a long time. You could say the NHL went to hell in a basket in two short seasons but it really escalated in the mid 80's when players and agents started disclosing their salaries.
Last edited:
It was very hard to find investors because the Oilers P&Ls and Balance Sheets sucked along with the 5 year forecasts without revenue sharing and a salary cap. Everyone saw where this was going and we did not want the risk and potential of cash calls along with shared ownership with 37 other owners, of which there were I think 2 in the coming years.
Look, we agree the team was not making money in the 90s. That is a fact that I am not disputing. The imbalance between costs and revenue went way out of whack fast for many reasons and really cratered in about 87 88, going downhill fast from there. Which we also agree on.
Where I disagreed with your post was that the Oilers did make money until then which was used to prop up his many other businesses, and then started selling players off when his net take on the Oilers couldn't be milked anymore. It was no longer a cash cow so players were sold off.
But the team was not for sale in 1987-88, there was no lineup of people to buy into a dysfunctional league and nobody was going to volunteer to pay Gretzky's salary, which you seemed to indicate should have happened when you said "I didn't see a lineup of local owners or business people (translation none) that were lining up to pay Wayne Gretzky what he was worth, to continue to play here." In 87-88 there was no reason for people to step up and pay Gretzky's salary because PP owned the team, and it was not for sale then.
When the team was sold in the 90's it was a different story and even 2 - 3 years made a big difference due to the economics of the time and the fact PP had sold off the assets in 2-3 years. Pocklington didnt read any tea leaves. Everyone knew where this was heading, you didnt need to be a savant. So he stripped the team of its valuable assets and sold a shell of a money losing hockey club to 37 great individuals who only wanted to help keep the team around and at least break even until a salary cap was introduced.
The Copper Jackets that Cal put together (I know the former key people of the CJ well) a great team to hit up the business community to step up and support the Oilers when seasons tickets dropped to about 8,000.
Drivesaitl
Finding Hemingway
Thanks again. Not much disagreement here. I'm not defending puck. I'm just saying getting out was the right thing for him and getting clean out of Edmonton was the right thing for him. He shorted or no paid about 100 local transactions in this area. A large list as you would know of companies and people that wouldn't even have anything to do with him. He was a narcissist Ayn Rand quoting f***er that believed the world stopped and started for himself.
Its interesting as well, and I said this earlier, is the only other person willing to Pay Gretz a fortune, or 15M for him, was another crook, McNall, read into that what you will. Its easier to spend other peoples money and fortunes.
For sure we agree that by around 87 NHL had stopped being a desirable business.
ManofSteel55
Registered User
BudBundy
Registered User
- May 16, 2005
- 5,989
- 8,103
I was riding in the car with my mom. I was 15. At the time, hockey was hockey and the business aspect of it was largely unknown to me. It was pure confusion and disbelief. My biggest lasting feeling was the deep ache of “what could have been.” How many more Cups could they have won. I kind of packaged it up in a bundle of hope for the future and started reading up on who Carson and Gelinas were and thinking about the draft picks. I do remember Pocklington already had a poor name and it wasn’t taking long for people to conclude that it was probably because of his growing financial problems.
Curious to see what people's opinions are for this question.
1989 - Calgary was at their peak, but we probably beat them in a series
1990 - won cup regardless
1991 - strong contenders, but up against a Pens machine
1992 - see 1991
1993 - we beat the Canadiens
1994 - Oiler heavy Ranger team won this one, good chance here
1995 - dream starts to die, but still possible to contend
Impossible to know how the pieces around the core would have sorted themselves out (especially in net), but with a continuing core of Gretzky, Messier, Kurri, Anderson and Lowe I think we could have won Cups all the way to around '95. I think conservatively we would have won 2 more than we ended up with ('89 and one of '91 or '92), but could have easily won as many as 4 more with the right moves.
BudBundy
Registered User
- May 16, 2005
- 5,989
- 8,103
I’m pretty sure Gretzky himself said his best guess was 4 more Cups (8 total) had they stayed together. The Rangers ‘94 win stacked with Oilers is instructive.
It is, but that team also had a loaded blue line and had Richter in net.
After about 1992, I think more cups would have been dependant on Sather's ability to bring in new blood on the blue line and in net.
Fourier
Registered User
II think your assessment is pretty close. They could have wone in any of those years but probably 2-3 more.
rboomercat90
Registered User
Does that Ranger team become so deep without Messier being there to prompt them to “go all in”? I’m guessing it doesn’t.
Ad
Latest posts
-
OT: The Pittsburgher Thread: Sneaking up onto training camp- Latest: MrBrightside
-
-
-
