Packers Financials

[Ring 6]

Convertedpatsfan found this link to the Packers financials.

When I looked them over they showed many things that are very different than what posters have been saying.
Essentially in 2010 the Packers received about 258mill in revenue.
Out of that revenue approximately the following happened for every dollar

63 cents went to player costs
37 cents was left

33 cents went to the other expenses of the franchise
4 cents was left for gross profit
2 cents of that went to 'other expenses' or taxes

2 cents was left for a net profit for the owners.

In 2005 about 12.5 cents of every dollar was left for net profit.

Revenues were 58mill more than 2005, yet owners made 20 mill less while player cost was increased by 63million.

So comparing 2005 to 2010:

The Packers generated 58mill more in revenue while seeing non-players costs rise 18mill.
There was 40million more left to 'share' between players and owners and the players got 63mill of it.

So from the Packers perspective while other costs are rising, players costs have risen faster than revenue.

I have asked many posters what would follow if the owners turned over their financials.
Well we have a preview, because 1 of the 32 have, so we can discuss it here.

 

[neuronet]

Aren't the owners the citizens of Green Bay or something like that?

Also, is there reason to think this isn't a representative sample, or do you think it is representative?

So 2 cents on the dollar means the owners get 5 million in profits. Given that they aren't playing the game, that's a pretty good sum of money to take home. Maybe not the best return on their investment, but if they are in this field as an investment....

 

[moosekill]

Aren't the owners the citizens of Green Bay or something like that?

Also, is there reason to think this isn't a representative sample, or do you think it is representative?

So 2 cents on the dollar means the owners get 5 million in profits. Given that they aren't playing the game, that's a pretty good sum of money to take home. Maybe not the best return on their investment, but if they are in this field as an investment....

5 million in profits before taxes on 258 million of revenues? You can't be serious, right? If this is representative the players are doomed.

 

[jays52]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that the Packers are run essentially as non-profit.

 

[jsull87]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that the Packers are run essentially as non-profit.

Once again i am not sure. But if as you said the profits are distributed to shareholders... it's not a non profit it's a public company as in all public companies the shareholders are the "Owners". So in reality its profit going to owners. The owners just so happen to be the fans/shareholders.

 

[patchick]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that the Packers are run essentially as non-profit.

Reminds me of the video store in Winchester that calls itself "The world's only intentionally non-profit video store."

AFAIK there has been no big shift in capitalist philosophy of the Packers' management from 2005 to the present.

 

[Ring 6]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that the Packers are run essentially as non-profit.

I think you are wrong.
They are publicly owned. I believe they tend to retain profits rather than declare dividends, but they are an exchange listed publicly held FOR PROFIT corp

 

[LuthierJr]

I didn't think they were non-profit but rather just a publicly held/owned organization.

 

[Ring 6]

Aren't the owners the citizens of Green Bay or something like that?

Also, is there reason to think this isn't a representative sample, or do you think it is representative?

So 2 cents on the dollar means the owners get 5 million in profits. Given that they aren't playing the game, that's a pretty good sum of money to take home. Maybe not the best return on their investment, but if they are in this field as an investment....

Any business that earns 2 cents of profit on every dollar of earnings is a bad year from bankrupt.

 

[neuronet]

OK I admit I know nothing about business. Taking home 5 million after all expenses and such paid seems pretty good to me. But that's because I make under 100k a year. :O

So, assuming I'm wrong about 5 million being not too bad (I can admit that), the Packers might well be an exception, with info released because it makes the owners look good.

Let's see the Patriots, Colts, Giants books, for instance....

Just sayin, likely not an accident that it was the Packers first. They have the least to hide, and probably it is best for the owners if the Packers release first.

Just a conjecture from someone largely ignorant of financial issues.

 

[Ring 6]

OK I admit I know nothing about business. Taking home 5 million after all expenses and such paid seems pretty good to me. But that's because I make under 100k a year. :O

So, assuming I'm wrong about 5 million being not too bad (I can admit that), the Packers might well be an exception, with info released because it makes the owners look good.

Let's see the Patriots, Colts, Giants books, for instance....

Just sayin, likely not an accident that it was the Packers first. They have the least to hide, and probably it is best for the owners if the Packers release first.

Just a conjecture from someone largely ignorant of financial issues.

The Packers were released because they are a publicly held corporation. The data has always been there.
No other teams are publicly traded, so they are not required to file these disclosures with the SEC.

Are they representative? Who knows. It looks as if their revenues seem to be consistent with the league, if I read it right.

258 mill per team at a 50/50 split (the unions proposal) would produce a 129mill cap per team. That sounds in the range of what is being reported.
While the Packers did have high player cost in 2010 of 160mill in the uncapped year, their profit was just 4mill in 2009 the capped year.

However, even if they were the least profitable team their financials do not tell a very good story. I would assume that the level of revenue a group of owners would demand would leave the worst off of them in the black, or they would be stabbing their weakest member in the back.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that the Packers are run essentially as non-profit.

Not sure, but it is the only publicly owned team and in the smallest NFL market, so I don't see how this relates to the rest of the league.

 

[Ring 6]

Not sure, but it is the only publicly owned team and in the smallest NFL market, so I don't see how this relates to the rest of the league.

What factors do you see that would be affected by the small market?
Each team receives the same amount from the TV deal.
The Packers sell out every game. I am sure people in that market spend as much on concessions when they attend a game as anyone else.
What about being in a small market makes them unrepresentative?

Their 258 mill revenue seems to be right in line with the league average if you extrapolate from the available reports, ie what 50% of revenue would equal in a salary cap and so forth.

And more than anything else, it is relevant because it is the only one we have.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

What factors do you see that would be affected by the small market?
Each team receives the same amount from the TV deal.
The Packers sell out every game. I am sure people in that market spend as much on concessions when they attend a game as anyone else.
What about being in a small market makes them unrepresentative?

Their 258 mill revenue seems to be right in line with the league average if you extrapolate from the available reports, ie what 50% of revenue would equal in a salary cap and so forth.

And more than anything else, it is relevant because it is the only one we have.

And the season ticket wiaiting list is about 40 years long.

 

[Ring 6]

And the season ticket wiaiting list is about 40 years long.

Which would imply that price per ticket is on the high side, since unlike the Dolphins they don't have any trouble getting whatever they ask for in ticket prices. Hell, I bet most of Green Bay would take out a second mortgage to be able to buy season tickets. Its the only game in town.

 

[Deus Irae]

Here's that link:

'97 through '09 Statement of Income

 

[Miguel]

Green Bay Packers in good shape for collective bargaining agreement | Green Bay Press Gazette | greenbaypressgazette.com

"However, their fiscal year runs from April 1 through March 31 each year, so their player costs for ’09 included $36.22 million in roster bonuses paid in March ’10 to Collins, Pickett, Clifton, Mark Tauscher, B.J. Raji and Clay Matthews. That’s far more than the Packers usually pay out at that time of year. "

In other words, 2010 is probably an outlier for the Packers since they chose to take advantage of an uncapped year using roster bonuses to front-load deals.

Cheesehead Sports Nut.com: Wednesday What Happened - Details on Clifton, Collins, Pickett, and Tauscher Deals
provides some details

 

[smg93]

Interesting. Did some quick calculations:

Average over the 13 Years from 1998 to 2010:

Revenue/Year: $173,570,777
Player Salaries as a % of Revenue: 56.82%
Total Operating Expense (including Player Salaries) / Total Revenue: 89.61%
Net Income Margin (including Revenue from Expansion Teams) : 10.14%
Net Income Margin (excluding Revenue from Expansion Teams): 8.48%

 

[BTTA]

The Packers' financials are not a representative sample for the purposes of this discussion. They ARE a non profit, and they are community owned, so their decisions about how to distribute their income are completely differently motivated than are the privately held, family businesses that most NFL teams are.

This isn't even an apples to oranges thread.

 

[billdog3484]

The Packers' financials are not a representative sample for the purposes of this discussion. They ARE a non profit, and they are community owned, so their decisions about how to distribute their income are completely differently motivated than are the privately held, family businesses that most NFL teams are.

This isn't even an apples to oranges thread.

Please provide us data showing us the Packers are non-profit. theres no way thats correct IMO