Page 1 of 1

Is the real problem the spirit group....

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 6:25 pm
by geeman
Cash flow!

Is it possible at the team ownership is having serious money
problems and that

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 6:56 pm
by conleyorbust
I don't know for sure but I haven't heard anything. Attendance is up slightly from last season when the team had OK cash flow. I don't think we've taken on any big expenses since.

It doesn't take a genious to look at the current situation and realize that we won't make the POs without a move and playoffs=revenue. Considering that there are minor moves that could have been made over the past month or two that wouldn't necessarilly change the cost structure, I don't know if cash flow is the problem. I'm sure they are hesitant to take on any major salary (Kidd, O'Neil, Gasol) but there are guys like Duhon that would help some and are expiring.

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 7:14 pm
by Hawks
http://tinyurl.com/328w2c

This may answer your questions.

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 7:23 pm
by conleyorbust
yeah, its always suprising who is actually making money in sports. I read a really interesting article about the Maple Leafs who are one of the most profitable franchises in North America even though they are losing. They have a loyal fan base, brilliant marketing, and amazing TV deals.

Anyway, you'd imagine that ticket sales would be commensurate, to an extent, with team success and excitement. If the team cost more to do a little better, a few more people would show up. From a $$$ perspective, its possible that they would rather just make the money they can off of corporate seats and TV deals and have a crappy franchise they doesn't cost much. I doubt it though.

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 11:26 pm
by D21
Hawks wrote:http://tinyurl.com/328w2c
This may answer your questions.


Now I understand this thing:
Three facts you need to know:

1. I am more than twice your age.
2. I have been a winner my entire life.
3. I have never bought anything I couldn't afford.
...
Best, Bruce.


he was not talking about sports at all ;)

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 11:50 pm
by betta1
A trade wouldn't even cost us much if the salaries are close enough.

I think it's more a matter of lack of savvy and competence I honestly have to say (and I hate having to admit it).

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 3:17 am
by Master8492
D21 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



he was not talking about sports at all ;)


The Hawks revenue increases every year. He's a businessmen so he's making a lot of money on the Hawks...

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 5:42 am
by HMFFL
The ASG should have plenty of money. It was a great investment by purchasing both the Thrashers and Hawks as a package. The value of both teams will only rise from here out or will stand pat. I believe they're willing to put this team towards the right direction, but I'm not sold they plan to pay the luxury cap, and It's ashame if they decided not to. I to be among the elite teams and hopefully the ASG is willing to dig deep into their pockets. On the other hand we're still missing a superstar, so we need to rely on playing over ball to fill the seats, so I view us along the lines of the Detroit Pistons (if that makes sense).


Hawks wrote:http://tinyurl.com/328w2c

This may answer your questions.


I actually have this bookmarked. Glad it's been updated within the past three months.

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 11:09 am
by D21
HMFFL wrote:...On the other hand we're still missing a superstar, so we need to rely on playing over ball to fill the seats, so I view us along the lines of the Detroit Pistons (if that makes sense).
...


Interesting point of view, but I doubt it will work. DET saw the real potential of the team before the majority of the players had to re-sign, only Rasheed was a very high salary but expiring. But all these players (excepting Ben Wallace) have prefered less money for staying together.
And I am not sure it will be the case here. Joe's salary is already higher than everyone in DET, and his salary will now count in the estimation of the Smith's extension, his agent will argue that Josh is more important than Joe or something like this.
If Josh Smith is re-signed for 60M/5yrs, and Joe signs an extension in two years with a starting salary under his actual one, this team could be build and viewed like DET.
If Josh is signed for 75M/5yrs, and Joe gets a salary increase for his extension, it will not a team like DET at all.
When this team started his rebuilt, I was hoping for a "DET like" one, but I am afraid it can't be possible since both Joshes did not sign extensions in October.