Roughriders Post $3M Profit

Roughriders post $3M profit
The Leader-Post June 10, 2010 Black is the colour for the Saskatchewan Roughriders.

Shareholders of the CFL team received the Roughriders’ financial statement in the mail Wednesday in advance of the June 19 annual general meeting. According to the document, the Roughriders posted a record profit of $3,148,500 last season – nearly double the profit from the previous year.

Total gross revenues for the fiscal year were $30.9 million compared to $28.5 million the previous year. Expenses grew from $26.6 million to $27.5 million last year due to increased expenditures associated with the Roughriders’ run to the 2009 Grey Cup and with costs relating to the celebration this year of the franchise’s centennial.

The profit was in part the result of a record $10.2 million in gate receipts – a 10-per-cent increase over the previous year’s total of $9.3 million.

As well, the Roughriders posted a record $7.1 million in merchandise sales in 2009-10, up from $6.5 million the previous year. A third Rider Store, which was opened in Saskatoon, achieved $1.5 million in sales in just five full months of operation.

Sponsorship revenue also increased during the fiscal year, growing 13 per cent to $4.3 million.

The Roughriders have overall net assets of $13 million, up 31 per cent from the previous year. As a result, the club was able to put another $3 million into its Stabilization Fund.

The AGM is set for June 19, 10 a.m., at the Queensbury Convention Centre.

© Copyright © The Regina Leader-Post

Read more: … z0qTa8CFt1

That’s awesome! :thup:

I'm sure they'll make even more money this year.

Given that they are a non-profit organization, they should have a pretty good stash to contribute to that spankin' new stadium. What else are they going to do with the $$?? Can't give it out as dividends ... to the chagrin of the "shareholders"!

Fantastic! Great support for the team there that transcends the team itself I'd say! :thup: If it wasn't so expensive out there, I'd consider getting out of southern Ontario and retiring there, the couple times I've been in the province I really liked it.

Actually I am ecstatic they cannot give it out to the "shareholders," as that always just means a select few corporate directors and cronies who hold most of the shares and not the average folks whether they are also shareholders or not.

And most of those dudes have no real loyalty to anything but quarterly profits all the same anyway, and when lavish some will just bolt all the same without re-investing any of those gains for the long-term success of any enterprise.

They were able to put $3 mil in the stabilization fund. That's pretty sweet.

Wow, the Green machine really knows how to print the green.
Over $30M in gross sales, I got to believe the profit is much higher but with all of the right offs the accountants were at work to allocate funds every which way possible.
And who said a CFL team cannot make big money.

The Riders have learned from the Esks how to allocate into long term and short term investments to keep their profits moderate. Only 6 years ago the Rider gross revenues were $11 million, now they spend $26.5 million. Much of that bonus has been converted into assets like rainy day funds, contingency funds, etc. But they will be expected to chip in for the new stadium in Regina, much like the Esks who paid for 1/2 of their new FieldTurf and financed their Field-house development at Commonwealth.

It's obvious they make more than that. But as stated, just like the Esks the profits are re-invested.
Still great to see the league's teams strong.

I don't really think that is the case here. I can't be sure of course but I doubt that many corporations gobbled up completely worthless shares that really have zero value other than a voting right. If you do a bit of research (google) you can look into the Rider shares. They are just a fundraising tactic.
That being said I am a proud owner and would love to get a $100 check in the mail every year. But I would rather it go to the stadium. As for the expenditures I would guess that a lot of the money went to the new Rider facility they created in the old Superstore building.

This why the CFL Need Revenue Sharing West Teams are making Money East Teams are not

Does the CFL need revenue sharing or do the eastern teams just need marketing courses? Would hate to establish a system of corporate welfare that provides an incentive for any team to make even less effort than they already do to turn a dollar. I'm not necessarily against revenue sharing but the negatives about it have to be understood as much as the (perceived) positives.

I agree whole-heartedly. Why should teams that have been prudent managers of the finances have to pay for years of inept, mostly American, owners who came in and created massive losses for their teams as a result of their gross mis-management?

Further, how can anyone suggest that a successful community-owned team in Sask., which basically owes its existence to tax payer money (i.e. the City of Regina subsidizng the stadium rent and government-owned crown corps investing in the team through sponsorships and advertizing), should send funds to privately owned teams in the east. Its ridiculous.

I believe revenue sharing is an absolute must in the CFL. Although teams should obviously be rewarded if their revenues are as high as the Riders and should keep the majority I think a revenue sharing "pot" should be in place. The reason i say this is no matter how good your marketing is most of the time you need to be winning to put bums in the seats. Well not every team can have a winning record every year. So if you have 2 or 3 losing seasons (or more) then the fans will stay away and I believe this will be the case again even for the mighty Riders. So as far feteched as it seems right now, in a few years if Hamilton has a new stadium or maybe even Toronto has a new stadium those teams could be the ones contributing to a revenue sharing fund and a western team could require assistance. It would make sense for the overall health of the CFL, in my opinion.

I don't know but revenue sharing between a small market team like the Riders compared with a potentially, or should-be major market team like Toronto, is just plain friggin strange in my books and rewards mediocrity in Toronto. IMHO. Toronto should be leading this league in just about every category other than number of wins in the win column, necessarily. I know, Toronto has so many entertainment options, but why doesn't someone from Toronto take pride in their team and build the perfect CFL stadium for them to succeed, at the local ownership level? I don't get it.

If there had been revenue sharing in the past then the Riders wouldn't have had to have a telethon to keep from going bankrupt. If there had been revenue sharing in the past the Bombers would not have needed a loan from the government. Every team in the league has gone through tough financial stretches at one point. It's Toronto and Hamilton now but it could easily be Saskatchewan or Edmonton ten years from now. Revenue sharing makes for a more stable league IMO.

honestly i dont think teams like sask,wpg, edm,cal and bc and montreal should be supporting 2 teams that have like double the population base of the 6 others combined. sorry, but... its just not fair really. say sask makes 5 million, bc makes 3, edmonton makes 3, calgary makes 3, wpg makes 2, montreal makes 2, but hamilton and toronto lose a combined i dunno... 18 million..


Montreal isn't making money. Their owner is on record saying he's lost millions.

Every other league (NHL, NFL, MLB, NBA) has revenue sharing in some form. Why not the CFL? As I said before, teams losing money goes in cycles. Killer, would your opinion be different if you were asked about revenue sharing when the Bombers were in serious financial trouble a few years ago. Same question to Rider fans, would your opinion be the same or different if revenue sharing had been brought up when the Riders were in deep trouble money-wise.

I agree. Revenue sharing is imperative. But there has to be some certain criteria met in order to receive revenue sharing. Ticket sales, merchandise sales, tv revenue, etc.

It's pretty obvious that a league can only be as strong as its weakest link.
These things are often cyclical for various reasons.

On that note, Mark Cohon was asked that question in an interview around Grey Cup, and his answer was that he would be prepared to look at revenue sharing under certain circumstances.