league revenue sharing

It has been reported that, out of every dollar spent on CFL merchandise, 54 cents is from somebody buying something green.

It has also been reported the community-owned team generated $28.2-million in revenue last year, an increase on the previous year, and miles ahead of where they were in 2004, when the Roughriders had $11-million in revenue.
The team reportedly moved more than $6.5-million in merchandise last year, more than any other CFL franchise.

That profitability is envied, and could come up for discussion at the league’s next board of governors meeting, when Argos owners David Cynamon and Howard Sokolowski are expected to revive the topic of revenue sharing. The notion was received poorly the last time it was raised, and a repeat could finally sway the duo into officially off-loading their struggling team.

just curious what peoples thoughts are on the topic of revenue sharing.

I don't see what the problem is. Every major professional sport in North America has revenue sharing (NHL, NFL, MLB, NBA). Almost every team in the league has had a bumpy patch financially at some point (including the Riders) and would have benefited from revenue sharing. Revenue sharing would help keep the league stable over the long term IMO.

i agree.

every team goes through a dark stretch, most recently hamilton, where they lose year after year, and puts the team in jeopardy of going bankrupt.

revenue sharing would prevent things from ever getting that bad, and probably put an end to all ownership changes.

Same as the Riders benefit from a disproportionate share of TV money.... it all balances out.

How do you figure that? Because the population in southern Ontario and Montreal are greater? But games involving the Riders have higher ratings that games involving the Ticats or Argos (except when they're playing the Riders).

i thought, over the last 3 years, games involving the tiger-cats have averaged the highest television ratings...im pretty sure ive read this on the ticats website.

Revenue sharing is a must. Thats what makes leagues stronger. You're only as strong as your weakest link. Every team has ups and downs, and to foster growth the owners need to buy into the mentality of a club, every one has one eight the importance...

Lions will need it next year with no stadium to play in. I don't see season ticket sales going well in Vancouver with the uncertainly of a place to play. No empire stadium left. HOw on earth will they have a place ready by then.

  • :cowboy:

im sure every team would want a piece of the pie during grey cups held in edmonton, montreal, toronto, and vancouver, where your getting attendance of 55,000-65,000, and profits of $5 million!

i dont know how many more years the ticats can go, when hamilton can't even host a grey cup in their stadium?

IMO, revenue sharing is a must!

Numbers that were in an article posted in another thread (http://www.truthandrumours.net/2009/11/%20...%20heap-shot/):

Five games had audiences of more than one million viewers. B.C. Lions-Saskatchewan Roughriders, Oct. 24 (O.T.), 1.2 million. Edmonton Eskimos-Roughriders, Sept. 20, 1.1 million. Eskimos-Calgary Stampeders, Sept. 7, Labour Day, 1.09 million. Stampeders-Roughriders, Nov. 7, 1.08 million. Roughriders-Lions, Oct. 2, 1.04 million.
The blog of Chris Zelkovich ([url]http://thestar.blogs.com/sportsmedia/[/url]) has been linked to here for most of the season and if you go through the ratings listed there most weeks this season the Riders' games are the top rated. From what I saw the only week their game wasn't was when they played the Als because the RDS numbers weren't included.

the riders have become the most watched team this season, but in recent years, its been the tiger-cats ( keep in mind, this is using the old rating system ):

[url=http://www.ticats.ca/article/tiger-cats-expect-labour-day-sell-out]http://www.ticats.ca/article/tiger-cats ... y-sell-out[/url]

The Ticats television ratings are among the league's best as Hamilton has averaged 413,500 viewers for all home games and has participated in TSN's two most-watched games this season, drawing 526,000 viewers for their home game against B.C. on July 31 and 515,000 viewers for their away game in Saskatchewan on August 16. Last year's Labour Day Classic between the Ticats and the Argos was the most watched regular season game of the year.

http://www.channelcanada.com/Article2439.html

in 2005, labourday matchup -ticats argos, produced tsn's, then, second highest CFL rating, peaking 826,000 using the old rating system.

anyways, this debate is kinda side-tracking from the topic

My point in bringing up the ratings wasn't to move the topic from revenue sharing but to ask HfxTC how the Riders are getting more than their fair share of TV money.

As for that article it does say the Ticats ratings are "among the league's best", not that they are the best. And you can't count the second game mentioned in the argument of who has the best ratings because it was against the Riders. I agree a debate on what team has the best ratings is a topic for another thread.

Revenue sharing of some sort is a must. Years ago the Argos were the dominant team financially and constantly complained about gate equalization. Commissioner Pete Rozelle fought a decade long battle with NFL owners to get them to accept revenue sharing. It is what has made the NFL as a whole stronger than the sum of its parts. In this, the CFL should take an example from the NFL.

How do you figure this?

I cant believe 54 cents out of every dollar goes to someone buying Esk''s stuff :lol:

I assumed they had some type of it in the first place like the NHL has.In the NHL if you buy merchandise in a home arena its the teams profits,but if you go down to walmart or somewhere its a league profit.

For the CFL you can say anything sold at a home stadium or team store or website should go the team,if one buys it from somewhere else its a CFL profit.

I'd really like to know how some owners want a peice of another teams pie before giving my OK.Cause if I go down to the Bomber Store and buy something BB related,and some % is going to another team,I'm not cool with that.But if I buy something BB related at another store,I have no prob sharing the wealth.

Actually, that's exactly how it is ... for merchandise. My understanding is that TV revenue is split equally amongst the teams one the League's office has taken a cut for its own operating expenses. I think the OP was more about gate revenues which isn't subject to any revenue sharing.

Revenue sharing is for teams that don't take the time to market their team properly. Toronto needs to hire someone who understands their market, and do it appropriately .

I asked him about that to and he never responded. Surprising since he usually has an answer for everything whether it's right or wrong. :wink:

Yeah, HfxTC is usually pretty coherent, but that one boggles me.

Anyway, it's interesting that Toronto had no real interest in revenue sharing in 1989 when they sold out Skydome for the entire year, or when SK was holding telethons to keep the team afloat.

And besides, there is revenue sharing: league sponsorship revenue and tv revenues are shared by the teams, as are franchise fees and, to the extent that it brings in revenue, cfl league apparel. Local advertising gate receipts and team merchandise sales are not revenue sharing items.

If Toronto wants to cash in on the sale of Rider gear, throw that Jays and Bills in Toronto crap out of Rogers Centre and stck some green clothes with an "S" on it.

Another biggie that is not revenue-shared is team (as opposed to league) sponsorship. Apparently, the Alouettes are to sponsorship revenues what the Riders are to merchandise revenues.

My own two bits on revenue sharing is that it is a bit "communist" - I know that is too strong of a word but hear me out. If teams are not directly profiting from their own efforts, they will make less effort. It's like the private plots of land in communist Russia that each family had accounted for a very disproportionate percentage of food production compared to the state commune farms. My views have nothing to do with wanting to hoard the Rider's riches (although I think the Riders are a prime example of reaping the rewards of working to build a brand).

Each team operates in a market and they need to do their homework to exploit their market in a way that maximizes their profits. Many outside of Sask say that the Riders are a success because they are the only game in town. While I think that statement is not accurate and/or oversimplifies their situation, they have overcome hurdles to succeed. Other teams in other markets have their own, and often different, hurdles to overcome. But if they do their homework, they will find their market niches, revenue streams, fan base, etc. But it sure doesn't happen by sitting around. And it sure won't happen if they wait for somebody else (the league, other teams) to do it for them.