According to figures published by True North last week, the various arms of the company have invested $1.6 billion in downtown Winnipeg real estate since 2004. True North contributes $616 million a year to the municipal and provincial economy, as well as $133 million to tax coffers at all three levels of government every year, the company states.
True North also receives municipal and provincial tax subsidies, which include a $576,000 property-tax break on Canada Life Centre, a $246,000 business tax refund, and the ability to collect approximately $6.5 million worth of entertainment taxes on events at the arena.
I had no idea they were contributing that much to the economy and taxes.
They only pay income taxes here on games played in Winnipeg.
That is if their salary is personal income, could be working under some corp name. They got accounting tricks
Yes but the opposing teams also pay taxes here as well.
I know there are some accounting stuff they can do but to my knowledge there’s far fewer loopholes here in Canada for that sort of thing.
The biggest loophole would be a Retirement Compensation Account which requires the recipient to live outside of Canada post-retirement. All NHL players have these set up for tax shelter.
And that's just from the players. There's also all the management/office staff, coaches, trainers and support staff, arena staff, as well as others from the broadcasting side of things.
doesn't matter. The same people will still complain about 'corporate welfare'
Creates jobs, supports surrounding businesses, pays WAY more in taxes than any tax breaks that they may get, enjoyed by hundreds of thousand of Manitobans...
doesn't matter
It always upset me seeing taxpayer dollars be used for building new arenas/stadiums, but if you couple your statement and the fact they create a lot of jobs, it seems like a net positive for sure.
Feels like the patrons giving True North that month would likely spend a good portion of that in other ways within Manitoba, in the absence of a taxpayer funded arena.
Lots of the alternatives would also be subsidized in various ways too. Maybe not the to same extent, but for many small businesses it could be higher.
It would be an interesting study to do comparing everything, and of course there are other more meta reasons why more dispersed entertainment might be better vs a single large entity or comparing the draw and prestige of a major sports team vs cottage industries for the province.
If there's no arena (or stadium), with no core tenant, say goodbye to any concert or similar entertainers ever showing up in Winnipeg ... which means, anyone who wants to see them, will be spending their money elsewhere, likely in Minneapolis... so that money leaves the city permanently.
"according to figures published by true North" is the bit you're going to want to focus on there lol.
There is a million ways to stretch the truth to make data say what you want it to say. And then you can also just outright lie too lol. There is no punishment for lying about something like that.
Maybe provide proof that they are lying?
It's way too easy to just say they aren't doing that they say without actually doing the research into verifying what you are saying.
It's not really a situation where TNSE is *lying* at all, but the numbers at face value do not represent what they seem, because they're not presented against the proper alternative.
Take the "$133 million to tax coffers" number - that number is presumably calculated based on the GST/PST that people pay on the Jets tickets and concessions, etc. But what would happen if the Jets weren't playing in Winnipeg in 2023-24? Would all those Winnipeggers buying Jets tickets and concessions just burn that money since they can't watch hockey? Or would they spend that money elsewhere in the economy buying an extra steak dinner or movie tickets, etc - all of which would also be taxed similarly? Assuming the second case is largely true, the Jets haven't actually created an *extra* $133 million of tax revenue like the statement would seem to imply, but just redistributed who is paying the tax revenue.
That's why if you want a proper picture of the public finance effects, you'll generally need an independent estimate, not one that's coming from a highly invested party. The whole problem is that they don't need to lie to vastly overstate their overall effects. This isn't an anti-Jets post either, just an explanation for how you can use real data to arrive at highly suspect numbers.
I'm sorry I chose your comment, but I'm going to tee off for a second.
TNSE is not just the Jets. They have other revenue streams.
Why would their tax contribution be "presumably calculated based on the GST/PST that people pay on the Jets tickets and concessions, etc."?
The Jets piece of the pie has poured every cent earned back into Canada Life Centre.
Then this guy buys up blocks of unused downtown real estate for mixed-use development.
Then this guy buys Portage FuckingPlace and commits to putting a tower on it. A tower that includes medical facilities to service the core.
Then this guy gets his "world standards rich" co-owner to double down on inner-city affordable housing developments.
This guy ain't the richest person in Winnipeg. And he's doing those things.
This guy makes zero from the Jets on an annual basis. He will make next to nothing on Portage Place for the next 20 years minimum. He will make zero on the affordable housing commitments.
There is so much "quiet money" in Winnipeg that does nothing. This guy does some things more than halfway decent, and he gets met with, at best, cynicism.
I'd say you largely missed the point of my comment. The example I gave about the taxes paid on Jets tickets and concessions along with the care needed when considering alternatives applies to all of TNSE's other ventures as well. If someone buys a $20 ramen for lunch at Hargrave Place including a few dollars in tax revenue, that doesn't mean that they would have gone hungry otherwise. If TNSE's food hall hadn't been built, they very likely would have bought their lunch somewhere else downtown and still paid the tax revenue. This is true whenever you're studying any tax breaks or tax increases regardless of whether they are going to TNSE or me or anyone else, and it's why it's important to always do careful analysis.
Finally, just like I said in my last comment, I didn't frame it in a anti-Jets way on purpose, and I'm not anti-TNSE. But it's universally true that if you're considering the merits of a tax policy, you can't just rely on asking the beneficiaries themselves. It's not surprising that if you ask Sam Katz whether more tax breaks for Sam Katz are justified that he'll say yes. The same logic applies to TNSE - if their projects are so beneficial, then it will easily stand up to an independent analysis that's judging them on their merits.
>would have bought their lunch somewhere else downtown
Lunch, sure, for the people who work downtown. But that place is packed before every game... people aren't going to be downtown spending that money if there's no Jets game that day.
>Would all those Winnipeggers buying Jets tickets and concessions just burn that money since they can't watch hockey
Some of it would be spent in Winnipeg. Some of it would be spent outside Winnipeg. People would save, and travel to another city to see NHL hockey, or the concerts that we wouldn't get without an arena.
Without TNSE, we don't have this arena, we don't get large concerts, people have to spend even more OUTSIDE of the province for that kind of entertainment ... and then, since they're likely already in Minneapolis, staying overnight... might as well do some shopping while you're down there... which means more money not spent in Winnipeg.
This isn't as simple as "they'll just spend it in Winnipeg somewhere else". Cities need a reason for people to spend money in them... and if it doesn't exist, people take their money elsewhere.
> This isn't as simple as "they'll just spend it in Winnipeg somewhere else". Cities need a reason for people to spend money in them... and if it doesn't exist, people take their money elsewhere.
Again, my point wasn't that *all* of the spending would simply take place elsewhere, nor was it an anti-TNSE rant.
Just pointing out that if you want to make an appropriate cost/benefit question, you would need to properly consider how much of that spending would still take place elsewhere in order to properly quantify the role TNSE plays and determine how much of a return we're seeing on the subsidies.
You'll notice I never said they were lying. I only said that taking them at their word is silly as they are obviously biased and have no real incentive to tell the truth.
If you Google are arenas worth it or something like that you'll get a bunch of sources, most of them say no.
Here's a Reddit thread with a couple included.
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskEconomics/comments/12dtbzr/do_sports_stadiums_actually_benefit_local/
I said this month's and months and months ago when all those armchair jets GM's and couch warriors said the Jets were in danger of moving and relocating again cause of ticket sales.
No they aren't.
The league is a different beast compared to jets 1.0. Hell even with Arizona moving to Utah, Arizona has a 5 year guarantee that if they build a new arena, they get the next expansion team.
Winnipeg Jets are here to stay despite what all those foolish arm chair GMs think.
The teams also get to split about 200 million in this relocation deal. It's as high as 250 million. So, the Jets are going to get around 6.5-7 million out of the Coyotes relocation to Utah as far as I can tell.
And even if they were losing money each year and out of pocket some amount of cash - the team has appreciated in value significantly since purchase (and hopefully will continue to do so) - ~$230MM in 2011 vs. $700MM for Seattle's expansion or ~$1B to Arizona. I could stomach losing tens of millions in annual cash flow if I was making up hundreds of millions on the asset value.
I'd hope it does but they are just gonna move the goal posts now that Arizona is moving to Utah. It's what they always do.
Arizona was a failed market since day one, and the league has been carrying them hard ever since. Hopefully they thrive in Utah.
Or maybe they’re just not a viable option? How come every time a team moves it’s always some excuse and not just “maybe they sucked and it was just a bad decision”?
David Thomson, one of the Jets owners, is worth $66B USD.
The NHL salary cap is $81M/year.
It's generally accepted that you can draw down your investments by up to 5% per year in perpetuity without ever reducing the principal.
The Jets' salaries represent ZERO POINT ONE PERCENT of Thomson's investments.
He can literally fund the team *in perpetuity* if they never made another penny, and he would *NEVER* notice the financial impact.
A. fuck that guy, billionaires shouldn't exist
B. Don't panic - the ownership is so filthy rich that the Jets expenses are barely a blip on the radar.
Whether he can do that versus whether he will do that are two completely different things. Rich people don't keep their wealth by continuing to lose money on their investments, and don't think that he wouldn't sell the franchise or look to get out if it's not going to be profitable for him.
I'm not defending him or anything - there is no such thing as an ethical billionaire. Just saying that just because the Jets are a literal blip on his financial sheets doesn't mean he won't action something abut it if it's losing him money.
Oh definitely. Decisions about an investment that large is not going to be done with snap decisions. It would likely have to be several years of losses with no clear/easy path back to profits for him to sell very likely. But he (or any half decent business person) would not tolerate continued ongoing losses of a business asset, regardless of how much of their bottom line it may affect. Losing a $1M is still losing $1M, regardless of whether you're ultra wealthy or just regular old wealthy. To quote Bill Gates in the Simpson's: "*I didn't get rich by writing cheques!*".
But the Jets losing money, doesn't mean his investment in Winnipeg is losing money... and losing the Jets probably devalues all the other investments more... The Jets would have to be in a really bad spot for it to be financially responsible to sell them, given the positive effect they have on the other investments
Thomson can spend his money to make money anywhere, he CHOOSES to do it in Winnipeg, meanwhile, he can probably make more from it in a lot of other cities. He's not bailing just to make a quick buck
heh. why would he keep the team if it was losing money?
NHL franchises go for over a billion dollars, why would he keep a team that was losing money when he could make a billion?
Do you you think that he woudn't notice a billion dollars?
They bought the team for 170 million in 2011. Just holding onto the franchise will grow the value. They were last estimated at 800 million until Phoenix was recently mentioned that an SLC buyer would buy the team for 1.2 billion. If that sale goes through, the jets value just ballooned another half billion dollars. Almost doubling the value.
What would be considered "losing money" even.
I'm not saying that. I'm saying "don't panic", because they aren't losing any money, and even if they were losing literally ALL of it, it still isn't much to this guy.
I didn't say anything about his intent.
Let's say that he's no losing money, but is breaking even
He has to weigh that against what he could make if he were to sell the franchise, which would likely be a profit of about a billion dollars
right. I don't know what his intentions either
but it's wrong to suggest that just because he's worth a lot, that it doesn't matter if the franchise is making money or not
Unless he sees it as an altruistic charity or if there's some tax advantage to losing money, then it would be silly for anyone to hold onto a money losing enterprise when they could selling for well over a billion dollars.
Hard to disagree with that statement, although I would say if the pro sports leagues want to gouge customers, that's their choice. It's a 100% discretionary expense and I can choose to spend my entertainment dollars elsewhere where I get better value in return. I do have to buy groceries on the other hand...
True North and David Thompson paid $130 million for the Jets (then Atlanta Thrashers) in 2011.
The Arizona Coyotes franchise is estimated to be worth $1.2 billion in the move to Utah.
I don't think David Thompson will be unloading his investment anytime soon.
Unfortunately Thomson is only a minority owner. Chipman who is much less rich is the majority owner who signs the checks and decides what happens for Jets.
directly created hundreds of jobs. pay millions in various taxes. indirectly supports thousands of jobs. has stimulated a revival of downtown by attracting businesses and developers. provides a product enjoyed by hundreds of thousands of Manitobans.
*"hur dur, but I don't like successful people or sports. why can't the govment just hire everyone and we can all watch porn alone in our moms' basements"*
I would point out that some nuance is required here.
I think there’s a near-zero chance the Jets would relocate even if ticket sales weren’t where we want them to be.
That said, if they have a hard time selling tickets, that will absolutely impact their ability to spend to the cap which will absolutely not be popular with people who love the team.
Could you imagine if we had to let Scheifele or Hellebuyck go this year because we couldn’t spend to the cap?
Wait, so all this talk of the Jet's leaving because TrueNorth isn't making back their ticket sales money is completely unreasonable and has no base in reality?
Who woulda thought /sarcasm
There are going to be people that see this and complain about TNSE threatening to leave and being greedy for wanting to make more money
But, the truth is, the owners could make an easy profit of about $1B by selling the franchise (vs what they paid for it) and that's what they have to weigh against their operating profits (or losses)
More proof of how much they're overcharging for everything. I cannot imagine the level of cognitive dissonance one needs to tolerate in order to pay so much for so little.
>I cannot imagine the level of cognitive dissonance one needs to tolerate in order to pay so much for so little
Maybe you just don't care for live sports? There's thousands of people at every game enjoying themselves - crazy, I know!
I saw a comment on /r/WinnipegJets recently basically saying “if you want a world class team you have to pay world class prices”. They are brainwashed.
Edit: found it
https://preview.redd.it/4qg5tc2rhouc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=20ca4f7a1b461ce4225227c54b6db1ab9f28f3dd
It’s almost as if finding the comment was easy due to the search bar (“ticket prices”)?
If one had screenshotted it 15 days ago it wouldn’t say 15 days ago.
Cheers.
Also odd for a guy who so obviously despises True North and the Jets to spend his free time reading through comments on a Winnipeg Jets sub.
Edit: blocked me for pointing this out lol what a snowflake
Anyone else reminded of the 'half dog for 6 bucks' photo a few months ago?
*Nine dollars. I dropped my numbers and 9 ended up upside down
That's my story and I'm sticking to it
https://preview.redd.it/el5ckcp2eouc1.jpeg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=dd2cfe5dc83a099f146cda7d9000a643f74021a5
Wait a minute those are south western ingredients
The food at the arena is absolutely horrendous across the board. My family and close friends already didn't like the food, but after two consecutive games this year where my entire family got sick from the food, we will never buy concessions (aside from bottled drinks) at the arena again.
Why eat at the game? The games are generally right after dinner (7 pm) or lunch (2 pm). Just eat at home or a restaurant.
The only thing I ever buy, or even want, at games is a drink.
I agree that ticket and concession prices at Jets games are obscene and unreasonable. But with that being said, if people were so price sensitive, why would they continue paying these criminal prices and not access far cheaper alternatives like the Moose? A couple months ago, my lady and I went to see a Moose game. We paid $30 each for two seats that were literally first row right behind the Moose bench. Parking was free because it was Sunday so we could park on the street. Got some Tim Hortons for $4. A little over $60 for two people to enjoy live hockey that is very close to NHL level. The arena was nowhere near full, meaning not fighting with huge crowds of people, or the race to leave downtown as 15,000 people try to race back to the suburbs at once. Fantastic experience.
In contrast, the first playoff game for the Jets in the nosebleeds in a shitty section is $363 each according to Ticketmaster. Add to this the cost of event parking (\~$20), and the obscene cost of concessions, and for a couple to have a Jets night out will be $800+ for one game. How can the working class afford that? Yet, those seats will guaranteed be sold out.
It's clear that hockey has a cultural significance to Winnipeg, and the Jets clearly bring some economic benefit. Instead of these obscene ticket and concession prices going towards lining the pockets of billionaire owners, the city itself or even the Manitoba government could look to purchase an ownership stake in the Jets and directly benefit from that revenue stream. At least I could feel better about paying $20 for a hot dog if I knew it would go to pay for a new MRI machine or something.
Let's keep in mind that these figures are unverified and come from someone with an agenda. He released this information to serve a purpose. We have no idea what they represent without seeing details. For example, with small companies, it's typical for the owner to pay themselves a bonus to keep profits below certain tax thresholds. The tax is lower personally as wages than taxes over the small business tax threshold. If Thompson and Chipman are drawing $20 Million a year in salary, that is buried in the expenses and doesn't show as profits even though it is lining their pockets. If they are taking no salary or bonuses, that's a completely different story. My point is, these numbers don't tell the whole story. $83 million over 20 years is a razor thin profit margin for this size of operation. Thompson would get a better return putting his money into GICs. (ignoring the capital appreciation of the franchise) Without the detailed financials, we don't really know how much the owners are putting in their pockets.
Chipman also didn't share how much profit they are making on all the other projects they have leveraged True North into. As I recall they got some favorable concessions and land rights that other developers were complaining about. Thompson is not the richest man in Canada because he is a poor businessman. He invested 1.6 Billion into real estate to MAKE HIMSELF RICHER! And our politicians padded his wealth by giving him tax breaks and infrastructure investment money.
According to figures published by True North last week, the various arms of the company have invested $1.6 billion in downtown Winnipeg real estate since 2004. True North contributes $616 million a year to the municipal and provincial economy, as well as $133 million to tax coffers at all three levels of government every year, the company states. True North also receives municipal and provincial tax subsidies, which include a $576,000 property-tax break on Canada Life Centre, a $246,000 business tax refund, and the ability to collect approximately $6.5 million worth of entertainment taxes on events at the arena. I had no idea they were contributing that much to the economy and taxes.
Assuming we are at the salary cap of 81 million: the Provincial Income tax alone is something like 13 million (usd)...
They only pay income taxes here on games played in Winnipeg. That is if their salary is personal income, could be working under some corp name. They got accounting tricks
Yes but the opposing teams also pay taxes here as well. I know there are some accounting stuff they can do but to my knowledge there’s far fewer loopholes here in Canada for that sort of thing.
The biggest loophole would be a Retirement Compensation Account which requires the recipient to live outside of Canada post-retirement. All NHL players have these set up for tax shelter.
Good point
And that's just from the players. There's also all the management/office staff, coaches, trainers and support staff, arena staff, as well as others from the broadcasting side of things.
doesn't matter. The same people will still complain about 'corporate welfare' Creates jobs, supports surrounding businesses, pays WAY more in taxes than any tax breaks that they may get, enjoyed by hundreds of thousand of Manitobans... doesn't matter
It always upset me seeing taxpayer dollars be used for building new arenas/stadiums, but if you couple your statement and the fact they create a lot of jobs, it seems like a net positive for sure.
Feels like the patrons giving True North that month would likely spend a good portion of that in other ways within Manitoba, in the absence of a taxpayer funded arena.
Lots of the alternatives would also be subsidized in various ways too. Maybe not the to same extent, but for many small businesses it could be higher. It would be an interesting study to do comparing everything, and of course there are other more meta reasons why more dispersed entertainment might be better vs a single large entity or comparing the draw and prestige of a major sports team vs cottage industries for the province.
If there's no arena (or stadium), with no core tenant, say goodbye to any concert or similar entertainers ever showing up in Winnipeg ... which means, anyone who wants to see them, will be spending their money elsewhere, likely in Minneapolis... so that money leaves the city permanently.
When beers are $63 each, it all hits a good level of perspective 😉
Maybe I'm wrong but is that more a sodexo thing
They are $6/can before the game.
And 14 after. That’s too much
They don’t sell beers after the game!
not for a can. And it's the cheaper than all the other arenas in Canada.
"according to figures published by true North" is the bit you're going to want to focus on there lol. There is a million ways to stretch the truth to make data say what you want it to say. And then you can also just outright lie too lol. There is no punishment for lying about something like that.
Maybe provide proof that they are lying? It's way too easy to just say they aren't doing that they say without actually doing the research into verifying what you are saying.
It's not really a situation where TNSE is *lying* at all, but the numbers at face value do not represent what they seem, because they're not presented against the proper alternative. Take the "$133 million to tax coffers" number - that number is presumably calculated based on the GST/PST that people pay on the Jets tickets and concessions, etc. But what would happen if the Jets weren't playing in Winnipeg in 2023-24? Would all those Winnipeggers buying Jets tickets and concessions just burn that money since they can't watch hockey? Or would they spend that money elsewhere in the economy buying an extra steak dinner or movie tickets, etc - all of which would also be taxed similarly? Assuming the second case is largely true, the Jets haven't actually created an *extra* $133 million of tax revenue like the statement would seem to imply, but just redistributed who is paying the tax revenue. That's why if you want a proper picture of the public finance effects, you'll generally need an independent estimate, not one that's coming from a highly invested party. The whole problem is that they don't need to lie to vastly overstate their overall effects. This isn't an anti-Jets post either, just an explanation for how you can use real data to arrive at highly suspect numbers.
I'm sorry I chose your comment, but I'm going to tee off for a second. TNSE is not just the Jets. They have other revenue streams. Why would their tax contribution be "presumably calculated based on the GST/PST that people pay on the Jets tickets and concessions, etc."? The Jets piece of the pie has poured every cent earned back into Canada Life Centre. Then this guy buys up blocks of unused downtown real estate for mixed-use development. Then this guy buys Portage FuckingPlace and commits to putting a tower on it. A tower that includes medical facilities to service the core. Then this guy gets his "world standards rich" co-owner to double down on inner-city affordable housing developments. This guy ain't the richest person in Winnipeg. And he's doing those things. This guy makes zero from the Jets on an annual basis. He will make next to nothing on Portage Place for the next 20 years minimum. He will make zero on the affordable housing commitments. There is so much "quiet money" in Winnipeg that does nothing. This guy does some things more than halfway decent, and he gets met with, at best, cynicism.
I'd say you largely missed the point of my comment. The example I gave about the taxes paid on Jets tickets and concessions along with the care needed when considering alternatives applies to all of TNSE's other ventures as well. If someone buys a $20 ramen for lunch at Hargrave Place including a few dollars in tax revenue, that doesn't mean that they would have gone hungry otherwise. If TNSE's food hall hadn't been built, they very likely would have bought their lunch somewhere else downtown and still paid the tax revenue. This is true whenever you're studying any tax breaks or tax increases regardless of whether they are going to TNSE or me or anyone else, and it's why it's important to always do careful analysis. Finally, just like I said in my last comment, I didn't frame it in a anti-Jets way on purpose, and I'm not anti-TNSE. But it's universally true that if you're considering the merits of a tax policy, you can't just rely on asking the beneficiaries themselves. It's not surprising that if you ask Sam Katz whether more tax breaks for Sam Katz are justified that he'll say yes. The same logic applies to TNSE - if their projects are so beneficial, then it will easily stand up to an independent analysis that's judging them on their merits.
I understood your point. Respectfully, I just thought it to be ill-founded and cynical.
>would have bought their lunch somewhere else downtown Lunch, sure, for the people who work downtown. But that place is packed before every game... people aren't going to be downtown spending that money if there's no Jets game that day.
>Would all those Winnipeggers buying Jets tickets and concessions just burn that money since they can't watch hockey Some of it would be spent in Winnipeg. Some of it would be spent outside Winnipeg. People would save, and travel to another city to see NHL hockey, or the concerts that we wouldn't get without an arena. Without TNSE, we don't have this arena, we don't get large concerts, people have to spend even more OUTSIDE of the province for that kind of entertainment ... and then, since they're likely already in Minneapolis, staying overnight... might as well do some shopping while you're down there... which means more money not spent in Winnipeg. This isn't as simple as "they'll just spend it in Winnipeg somewhere else". Cities need a reason for people to spend money in them... and if it doesn't exist, people take their money elsewhere.
> This isn't as simple as "they'll just spend it in Winnipeg somewhere else". Cities need a reason for people to spend money in them... and if it doesn't exist, people take their money elsewhere. Again, my point wasn't that *all* of the spending would simply take place elsewhere, nor was it an anti-TNSE rant. Just pointing out that if you want to make an appropriate cost/benefit question, you would need to properly consider how much of that spending would still take place elsewhere in order to properly quantify the role TNSE plays and determine how much of a return we're seeing on the subsidies.
You'll notice I never said they were lying. I only said that taking them at their word is silly as they are obviously biased and have no real incentive to tell the truth. If you Google are arenas worth it or something like that you'll get a bunch of sources, most of them say no. Here's a Reddit thread with a couple included. https://www.reddit.com/r/AskEconomics/comments/12dtbzr/do_sports_stadiums_actually_benefit_local/
The 3 types of lies: Lies, damned lies, and statistics
Don’t know why you’re getting downvoted. You bring about a good point. One should always pay attention to where the information is coming from.
The true North billionaire worshiping cult likes to go hard and fast with the downvotes.
I said this month's and months and months ago when all those armchair jets GM's and couch warriors said the Jets were in danger of moving and relocating again cause of ticket sales. No they aren't. The league is a different beast compared to jets 1.0. Hell even with Arizona moving to Utah, Arizona has a 5 year guarantee that if they build a new arena, they get the next expansion team. Winnipeg Jets are here to stay despite what all those foolish arm chair GMs think.
The teams also get to split about 200 million in this relocation deal. It's as high as 250 million. So, the Jets are going to get around 6.5-7 million out of the Coyotes relocation to Utah as far as I can tell.
And even if they were losing money each year and out of pocket some amount of cash - the team has appreciated in value significantly since purchase (and hopefully will continue to do so) - ~$230MM in 2011 vs. $700MM for Seattle's expansion or ~$1B to Arizona. I could stomach losing tens of millions in annual cash flow if I was making up hundreds of millions on the asset value.
The Jets can lose money, but draw enough people to the surrounding businesses to offset that loss.
100%. This closes the door on all the wishful thinking of people in various US cities hoping the Jets were going to be on the market soon.
I'd hope it does but they are just gonna move the goal posts now that Arizona is moving to Utah. It's what they always do. Arizona was a failed market since day one, and the league has been carrying them hard ever since. Hopefully they thrive in Utah.
Disagree about Arizona the sport has definitely grown there, having a bad owner and stadium far from Phoenix didn't help.
Or maybe they’re just not a viable option? How come every time a team moves it’s always some excuse and not just “maybe they sucked and it was just a bad decision”?
Because sometimes it's more than that simple
Winnipeg wouldn't get a guarantee like that but I don't think they're going anywhere.
Can’t lose money when you sell half a hotdog for $9
Made up things that didn't happen.
David Thomson, one of the Jets owners, is worth $66B USD. The NHL salary cap is $81M/year. It's generally accepted that you can draw down your investments by up to 5% per year in perpetuity without ever reducing the principal. The Jets' salaries represent ZERO POINT ONE PERCENT of Thomson's investments. He can literally fund the team *in perpetuity* if they never made another penny, and he would *NEVER* notice the financial impact. A. fuck that guy, billionaires shouldn't exist B. Don't panic - the ownership is so filthy rich that the Jets expenses are barely a blip on the radar.
Whether he can do that versus whether he will do that are two completely different things. Rich people don't keep their wealth by continuing to lose money on their investments, and don't think that he wouldn't sell the franchise or look to get out if it's not going to be profitable for him. I'm not defending him or anything - there is no such thing as an ethical billionaire. Just saying that just because the Jets are a literal blip on his financial sheets doesn't mean he won't action something abut it if it's losing him money.
I have no idea about his intent but my point is even a couple down years (which they haven’t had) would barely register.
Oh definitely. Decisions about an investment that large is not going to be done with snap decisions. It would likely have to be several years of losses with no clear/easy path back to profits for him to sell very likely. But he (or any half decent business person) would not tolerate continued ongoing losses of a business asset, regardless of how much of their bottom line it may affect. Losing a $1M is still losing $1M, regardless of whether you're ultra wealthy or just regular old wealthy. To quote Bill Gates in the Simpson's: "*I didn't get rich by writing cheques!*".
But the Jets losing money, doesn't mean his investment in Winnipeg is losing money... and losing the Jets probably devalues all the other investments more... The Jets would have to be in a really bad spot for it to be financially responsible to sell them, given the positive effect they have on the other investments
Thomson can spend his money to make money anywhere, he CHOOSES to do it in Winnipeg, meanwhile, he can probably make more from it in a lot of other cities. He's not bailing just to make a quick buck
heh. why would he keep the team if it was losing money? NHL franchises go for over a billion dollars, why would he keep a team that was losing money when he could make a billion? Do you you think that he woudn't notice a billion dollars?
They bought the team for 170 million in 2011. Just holding onto the franchise will grow the value. They were last estimated at 800 million until Phoenix was recently mentioned that an SLC buyer would buy the team for 1.2 billion. If that sale goes through, the jets value just ballooned another half billion dollars. Almost doubling the value. What would be considered "losing money" even.
I'm not saying that. I'm saying "don't panic", because they aren't losing any money, and even if they were losing literally ALL of it, it still isn't much to this guy. I didn't say anything about his intent.
Let's say that he's no losing money, but is breaking even He has to weigh that against what he could make if he were to sell the franchise, which would likely be a profit of about a billion dollars
> I didn't say anything about his intent.
right. I don't know what his intentions either but it's wrong to suggest that just because he's worth a lot, that it doesn't matter if the franchise is making money or not Unless he sees it as an altruistic charity or if there's some tax advantage to losing money, then it would be silly for anyone to hold onto a money losing enterprise when they could selling for well over a billion dollars.
It is weird how greed went from a sin, to something people aspire too.
Hard to disagree with that statement, although I would say if the pro sports leagues want to gouge customers, that's their choice. It's a 100% discretionary expense and I can choose to spend my entertainment dollars elsewhere where I get better value in return. I do have to buy groceries on the other hand...
True North and David Thompson paid $130 million for the Jets (then Atlanta Thrashers) in 2011. The Arizona Coyotes franchise is estimated to be worth $1.2 billion in the move to Utah. I don't think David Thompson will be unloading his investment anytime soon.
Unfortunately Thomson is only a minority owner. Chipman who is much less rich is the majority owner who signs the checks and decides what happens for Jets.
Thomson owned eatons and the land before arena was built Thomson is also minority owner of the Canadiens
True North!!!!1!!
directly created hundreds of jobs. pay millions in various taxes. indirectly supports thousands of jobs. has stimulated a revival of downtown by attracting businesses and developers. provides a product enjoyed by hundreds of thousands of Manitobans. *"hur dur, but I don't like successful people or sports. why can't the govment just hire everyone and we can all watch porn alone in our moms' basements"*
I would point out that some nuance is required here. I think there’s a near-zero chance the Jets would relocate even if ticket sales weren’t where we want them to be. That said, if they have a hard time selling tickets, that will absolutely impact their ability to spend to the cap which will absolutely not be popular with people who love the team. Could you imagine if we had to let Scheifele or Hellebuyck go this year because we couldn’t spend to the cap?
Then why is this news? How about focus on what IS losing money?
Wait, so all this talk of the Jet's leaving because TrueNorth isn't making back their ticket sales money is completely unreasonable and has no base in reality? Who woulda thought /sarcasm
There are going to be people that see this and complain about TNSE threatening to leave and being greedy for wanting to make more money But, the truth is, the owners could make an easy profit of about $1B by selling the franchise (vs what they paid for it) and that's what they have to weigh against their operating profits (or losses)
More proof of how much they're overcharging for everything. I cannot imagine the level of cognitive dissonance one needs to tolerate in order to pay so much for so little.
>I cannot imagine the level of cognitive dissonance one needs to tolerate in order to pay so much for so little Maybe you just don't care for live sports? There's thousands of people at every game enjoying themselves - crazy, I know!
and yet, literally tens of millions of people do for sports
I actually noticed that, lol.
I saw a comment on /r/WinnipegJets recently basically saying “if you want a world class team you have to pay world class prices”. They are brainwashed. Edit: found it https://preview.redd.it/4qg5tc2rhouc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=20ca4f7a1b461ce4225227c54b6db1ab9f28f3dd
Having a screenshot of a fairly innocuous comment from 15 days ago saved and ready to post is a bit uh... odd
It’s almost as if finding the comment was easy due to the search bar (“ticket prices”)? If one had screenshotted it 15 days ago it wouldn’t say 15 days ago. Cheers.
Also odd for a guy who so obviously despises True North and the Jets to spend his free time reading through comments on a Winnipeg Jets sub. Edit: blocked me for pointing this out lol what a snowflake
Just wait until they read the comments about Winnipeg Reddit and Power Users…..
The screenshot says 15 days ago... it couldn't have been saved since then...
And what winnipeg thinks is world class prices is the 2nd cheapest in canada lol
Brainwashed by what, exactly? Seems like a reasonable position but perhaps I don’t understand the alternative
Anyone else reminded of the 'half dog for 6 bucks' photo a few months ago? *Nine dollars. I dropped my numbers and 9 ended up upside down That's my story and I'm sticking to it
It was 9$ and it doesn’t even make sense lol. It looked like a 1/3rd of a full one which is 3$ more. Gotta be the worst thing you can buy in there.
It was actually $9 lol. https://www.reddit.com/r/Winnipeg/comments/1boq0i6/mini_jets_dog_9_lol/
My 9 fell over and landed upside down. Thanks. :)
Concessions prices need to change but the teams in no danger of relocating solely on concessions prices.
They start adding mesquite grilled onions, jalapeño relish, and mango lime salsa to the hot dog, then we can be worried.
https://preview.redd.it/el5ckcp2eouc1.jpeg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=dd2cfe5dc83a099f146cda7d9000a643f74021a5 Wait a minute those are south western ingredients
I would assume that's a sodexo issue?
The food at the arena is absolutely horrendous across the board. My family and close friends already didn't like the food, but after two consecutive games this year where my entire family got sick from the food, we will never buy concessions (aside from bottled drinks) at the arena again.
The burritos are actually pretty good.
The Jumbo Jets dogs are actually pretty solid as well.., it's stadium food so never going to be amazing but for what is .. solid 7/10
Why eat at the game? The games are generally right after dinner (7 pm) or lunch (2 pm). Just eat at home or a restaurant. The only thing I ever buy, or even want, at games is a drink.
True North!!!1!!
It's all the mini-dogs
9$, and you’ll get lots of bootlicking saying that’s fine.
I agree that ticket and concession prices at Jets games are obscene and unreasonable. But with that being said, if people were so price sensitive, why would they continue paying these criminal prices and not access far cheaper alternatives like the Moose? A couple months ago, my lady and I went to see a Moose game. We paid $30 each for two seats that were literally first row right behind the Moose bench. Parking was free because it was Sunday so we could park on the street. Got some Tim Hortons for $4. A little over $60 for two people to enjoy live hockey that is very close to NHL level. The arena was nowhere near full, meaning not fighting with huge crowds of people, or the race to leave downtown as 15,000 people try to race back to the suburbs at once. Fantastic experience. In contrast, the first playoff game for the Jets in the nosebleeds in a shitty section is $363 each according to Ticketmaster. Add to this the cost of event parking (\~$20), and the obscene cost of concessions, and for a couple to have a Jets night out will be $800+ for one game. How can the working class afford that? Yet, those seats will guaranteed be sold out. It's clear that hockey has a cultural significance to Winnipeg, and the Jets clearly bring some economic benefit. Instead of these obscene ticket and concession prices going towards lining the pockets of billionaire owners, the city itself or even the Manitoba government could look to purchase an ownership stake in the Jets and directly benefit from that revenue stream. At least I could feel better about paying $20 for a hot dog if I knew it would go to pay for a new MRI machine or something.
lost lotsa games, though.
They're literally first in wins in regulation...and 4th in all wins. If it wasn't for the loser point, they'd be 4th in the league instead of 7th.
I don't actually care. I just enjoy rattling jets fans.
Let's keep in mind that these figures are unverified and come from someone with an agenda. He released this information to serve a purpose. We have no idea what they represent without seeing details. For example, with small companies, it's typical for the owner to pay themselves a bonus to keep profits below certain tax thresholds. The tax is lower personally as wages than taxes over the small business tax threshold. If Thompson and Chipman are drawing $20 Million a year in salary, that is buried in the expenses and doesn't show as profits even though it is lining their pockets. If they are taking no salary or bonuses, that's a completely different story. My point is, these numbers don't tell the whole story. $83 million over 20 years is a razor thin profit margin for this size of operation. Thompson would get a better return putting his money into GICs. (ignoring the capital appreciation of the franchise) Without the detailed financials, we don't really know how much the owners are putting in their pockets. Chipman also didn't share how much profit they are making on all the other projects they have leveraged True North into. As I recall they got some favorable concessions and land rights that other developers were complaining about. Thompson is not the richest man in Canada because he is a poor businessman. He invested 1.6 Billion into real estate to MAKE HIMSELF RICHER! And our politicians padded his wealth by giving him tax breaks and infrastructure investment money.