Skip to content

De Smith may attend Packers shareholders meeting, too

On Friday, the Packers announced that Commissioner Roger Goodell will attend the team’s annual shareholders meeting, and that he’ll answer questions submitted by the various public owners of the team.

As it turns out, Goodell may have some company.

Greg Bedard of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports that “it’s very possible” NFLPA Executive Director De Smith will pop in, too.

To the extent that the event ends up serving as an impromptu debate venue for the two key players in the ongoing labor drama, the Packers’ financial performance in the most recent fiscal year could end up providing a backdrop that favors the league’s objectives.  Aaron Nagler of Cheesehead TV suggests that the numbers “will not be pretty.”

Last year, the team’s operating profits fell from $34 million to $20 million.  At the union’s annual pre-Super Bowl press conference, Smith scoffed at the trend, which has raised legitimate questions regarding whether he understands fundamental concepts of business valuation.

Given that Smith shrugged off the $14 million reduction in operating profit last year, it’ll be interesting to see what he does this time around.  We’ve got a feeling that the league hand picked the venue for Goodell’s appearance in large part because the league already knows that the news won’t be good for the Packers — which will end up being good for the league’s effort to reshuffle the current player compensation model.

UPDATE:  For those of you who think that the drop in operating profits reflects investment losses, think again.  Total profits, including investment losses, were only $4 million.  That’s why we used the term “operating profits.”

Permalink 40 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Green Bay Packers, Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Top Stories, Union
40 Responses to “De Smith may attend Packers shareholders meeting, too”
  1. sunflower100 says: Jun 19, 2010 9:07 AM

    To be fair, if the economy wouldn’t have tanked the Packers likely would have made a fairly decent profit.

  2. durno99 says: Jun 19, 2010 9:39 AM

    Let’s see here? If you take 14 away from 20, that leaves 6. I did the math for Jimmy and Bob. That would not be much of a profit for a team assuming the Packers make the playoffs and hold the same interest level. It is becoming clear that the Packers are not a very profitable team hence using Green Bay as the venue for owners to make their point. What will happen if this downward spiral continues? BROKE BABY! In the words of Eddie Murphy…….You can’t have the ice cream because you can’t afford it! I guess you can turn Lambeau into a low income housing complex, people are already shooting guns in that area anyway………..SKOAL BABY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  3. djstat says: Jun 19, 2010 9:47 AM

    De Smith is going to destroy the NFL and ruin the player’s golden goose. What’s worse, is the players are paying him to do so.

  4. TheVerve says: Jun 19, 2010 9:50 AM

    Too bad. I guess the “best franchise in all of sports” just can’t make it without Brett Favre.
    Or maybe it’s because everyone spends their $9 wages on cheese while they watch cheesehead TV.

  5. GBfanForever says: Jun 19, 2010 10:03 AM

    It makes sense this will happen there as the Packers are the only team with open books and thus the only data point available in the debate. What’s neglected in reporting on this labor topic is what is really at stake for both sides. I’m not honestly sure anymore. All we know is that the league wants a salary cap and rookie cap because they say they’re going broke and that players only accept that if UFA is attainable quickly for a player. People with political agendas will snipe at both sides but this is essentially just capitalism at work; players and owners both want as much money as they can get and will say anything (true or not) to get it. I like Goodell on a personal level but I don’t like that he seems to be only representing owners interests in this matter. As the commish he has a responsibility to both owners and players and he is 99% ownership at this point.

  6. Charisma says: Jun 19, 2010 10:12 AM

    Cue the morons. Contra begging for a response is usually the first of them.
    Fact is they don’t need to turn a profit. So I hope the profit is zero dollars. Because then they are keeping the fans pockets in better shape (the owners, afterall).
    Dip in profit isn’t stopping them from talking stadium additions even though it is already state of the art minus a 70 yard television screen.

  7. I HATE mike florio says: Jun 19, 2010 10:16 AM

    Something I hope you reada Florio. Yes, I know you are just a blogger but I have hope for you.
    “The Society of Professional Journalists was established in 1909 and sets forth a Code of Ethics that in theory are to be used as guidelines for its members. Summarizing the Code’s key points:
    · Seek Truth and Report It: Journalists should be honest, fair and courageous in gathering, reporting and interpreting information.
    · Minimize Harm: Ethical journalists treat sources, subjects and colleagues as human beings deserving of respect.
    · Act Independently: Journalists should be free of obligation to any interest other than the public’s right to know.
    · Be Accountable: Journalists are accountable to their readers, listeners, viewers and each other.”

  8. PackFansLikeSheep says: Jun 19, 2010 10:29 AM

    Ted Thompson has offered to do lap dances at the meeting to raise extra revenue. He still won’t sign free agents tho.

  9. stetai says: Jun 19, 2010 10:46 AM

    No s*** the profits went down for the Packers, and they will every year. This is what happens when you ship the biggest star in NFL history to the Minnesota Vikings.
    Anyone who’s been to GB knows Favre merchandise is everywhere and he’s the reason people come from all over the world to GB to see him play. That’s all over now.

  10. Randomjim says: Jun 19, 2010 10:49 AM

    I think the rest of the teams host cities should take the NFL to court to let cities own teams. Then the owners couldn’t threaten to leave if they don’t get there way.

  11. JimmySmith says: Jun 19, 2010 11:37 AM

    For the uninformed (read: Viking fans) among you, the NFL is using the Packers as PR ploy to suggest that all the owners are suffering just because the Packers are the only “Public” team and thus the only team with financial transparency.
    But a closer look at the numbers does give insight, the biggest dropoff in revenue came from merchandising sales, you know, those over priced jerseys and hats in the Pro shop. That makes sense in a bad economy. Plus, one of the biggest sellers over the years was the #4 jersey and that revenue was transfered to Minnesota along with the back breaking, season ending INT’s.

  12. GBfanForever says: Jun 19, 2010 11:47 AM

    JimmySmith says:
    June 19, 2010 11:37 AM
    For the uninformed (read: Viking fans) among you, the NFL is using the Packers as PR ploy to suggest that all the owners are suffering just because the Packers are the only “Public” team and thus the only team with financial transparency.
    But a closer look at the numbers does give insight, the biggest dropoff in revenue came from merchandising sales, you know, those over priced jerseys and hats in the Pro shop. That makes sense in a bad economy. Plus, one of the biggest sellers over the years was the #4 jersey and that revenue was transfered to Minnesota along with the back breaking, season ending INT’s.
    ——————————————————–
    Good comment. Did you notice that the same vikings fans who cry like little babies when packer fans smack them down on vikings related posts trip over themselves (which, lets face it, happens a lot when they spend most of the day drunk) to post anything on a thread that even remotely relates to the packers. Hypocrite isn’t a strong enough word.

  13. FoF says: Jun 19, 2010 11:57 AM

    The Three Stooges are running the team into the ground. Won’t be long before the Pack start losing money.

  14. edgy1957 says: Jun 19, 2010 12:12 PM

    Last year, the team’s operating profits fell from $34 million to $20 million.
    ******************
    As I continue to point out, this is because of their failed investments and is NOT related to the players or to TEAM RELATED costs. Anyone that’s ever had to fill out a shareholder report knows that you can bury your mistakes in so many ways to make it more palatable for the shareholders. Any one that wants to more of the truth, go to Forbes and read their report on the Packers to see what they have to say about this.

  15. HC says: Jun 19, 2010 12:16 PM

    The theory that the Packers’ profits dropped $14 million due to lower merchandise sales is not valid. All 32 NFL teams receive an equal portion from a 12% royalty on all NFL branded merchandise. The only additional profit a team gets to keep is from what they sell at the stadium for home games – when they get to keep a profit of the sale just like a store in the mall does.
    Since the vast majority of apparel and merchandise is purchased at locations other than the stadium on game days, there is no way lower apparel sales account for that drop in profits.

  16. Bob Nelson says: Jun 19, 2010 12:22 PM

    For most everyone the Green Bay Packers stockholders meeting is the first event of the season. It is held a few days before training camps open and 10 days before they sell out the stadium for the Family Night scrimage.
    Stockholders get to meet and discuss the all aspects of the team with team management.
    The Green Bay Packers have spent a lot of money moving and upgrading their practice field, making it even more fan friendly, expanding the NFL’s #1 Pro Shop, buying land around the stadium and other projects. It has been an excellent time to spend on capital projects so not much surplus revenue shows up.
    That will be NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell’s opening to reiterate a need for the new CBA.
    It will also be an opening for De Smith to thank the Green Bay Packers for their openess and candor. He then can call for all franchises to do what the Green Bay Packers have done; open the books for the world to see.
    Both sides in this dispute love the Green Bay Packers.

  17. leshon42 says: Jun 19, 2010 12:42 PM

    De’Smith b prepared to b booed out of the frozen tundra no way the fans side with you !!

  18. Contra says: Jun 19, 2010 12:48 PM

    JimmySmith says:
    June 19, 2010 11:37 AM
    Plus, one of the biggest sellers over the years was the #4 jersey and that revenue was transfered to Minnesota along with the back breaking, season ending INT’s.
    ———
    only to be replaced by season ending punts.

  19. bblogger says: Jun 19, 2010 12:51 PM

    Let me get this straight. Your two main sources of revenue TV and Ticket Sales are unchanged and you are having financial difficulties? A statement like that screams for an audit of the last 3 to 5 years

  20. Love_Boat_Scandal says: Jun 19, 2010 1:00 PM

    The Packers are set up like a non-profit org. All revenues go back into the team. They’ve got a big, fat reserve where “profits” go into for rainy day projects, like stadium renovations.
    The league is using the Pack because they have open books, and because they have consistently loyal fans. Therefore, a drop in operating profit suggests that league-wide most teams must also be experiencing drops in operating profit. Packers’ profits are less affected by win-loss record, because their fans are not fair-weathered.

  21. JimmySmith says: Jun 19, 2010 1:10 PM

    HC says:
    June 19, 2010 12:16 PM
    The theory that the Packers’ profits dropped $14 million due to lower merchandise sales is not valid.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    But it is valid because there was a very steep dropoff in sales from the Packer Pro shop which is part of the stadium and is a year round tourist spot for Green Bay. Same store sales are down $9 million from last year, that is likely due to a poor economy where Joe SixPack is not going to fork over $200 for a jersey when he doesn’t have a job.
    Let me guess, you’re a Viking fan, right? My advice to you is to continue to catch the little bus to school and some day you might graduate to the fry machine like some of the other Viking fans.

  22. steely devil hab says: Jun 19, 2010 1:12 PM

    sunflower100 says:
    June 19, 2010 9:07 AM
    To be fair, if the economy wouldn’t have tanked the Packers likely would have made a fairly decent profit.
    ——————–
    And if my grandmother had wheels, she be a wagon…

  23. Hank says: Jun 19, 2010 1:38 PM

    For the idiot Vagine fans:
    From Forbes NFL team evaluations list:
    http://www.forbes.com/lists/2009/30/football-values-09_Green-Bay-Packers_302814.html
    Minnesota #31 (yes, 31 of 32)
    The skinny
    The Vikings wooed QB Brett Favre for months trying get the future Hall of Famer to come out retirement once again. He finally committed and the franchise has Super Bowl aspirations. The Vikings biggest problem remains their stadium situation. The Metrodome is one of the oldest buildings in the league and keeps the Vikings at the bottom of the NFL’s revenue standings. The team has not gotten anywhere trying to get funding for a new building from the state legislature. If a deal can not be struck look for the Vikes to fill the NFL’s gaping hole in Los Angeles when the team’s lease at the Metrodome expires after the 2011 season.
    Green Bay #17
    The skinny
    The only NFL franchise owned by the public took a big hit from asset devaluations during the past year. The Green Bay Packers net income fell 80% last year, to $4 million, due in large part to a $50 million decrease in the value of its investment portfolio. It is believed most of the team’s investments are in stocks and real estate. But the team’s balance sheet remains rock-solid with shareholders’ equity of $233 million and total liabilities of just $65 million. There are no other professional sports in Green Bay and the team has a waiting list of over 70,000 names for season tickets.
    Now I know you kiddies don’t know squat about history, economics or even to wipe your own ass but the Packers are “publicly owned”, which means they count on their investments, not Zygi’s pocket book. How is it that a franchise in a metro area with 300,00 people and stadium with no dome using a mere 295 million for renovations on a 60+ year old stadium is significantly more valuable even after the economy took one of the biggest dumps in modern history? As a market, Vagine fans suck balls. The NFL is looking at a franchise they can rebrand for L.A.
    There is no other significant value to the Vagines as a NFL franchise, even to other owners other than L.A. media market bait. Lakers, Stars, Vagines . . . what a pantheon of failure for the Minny market.
    Quit sucking your thumbs now in the fetal position in the corner and start posting some cliche comebacks about “mother” or your personal gay fantasies projected onto me.

  24. Qoojo says: Jun 19, 2010 1:44 PM

    For you geniuses saying it was all due to the drop in fans buying Favre jerseys, he left two seasons ago, not one. So you are comparing two Favre-less seasons, not one with and without Favre.

  25. Old_Style says: Jun 19, 2010 1:55 PM

    The reason they look to the Packers as a measuring stick is that they are publicly owned and their books are relatively transparent.

  26. edgy1957 says: Jun 19, 2010 2:06 PM

    JimmySmith says: June 19, 2010 11:37 AM
    But a closer look at the numbers does give insight, the biggest dropoff in revenue came from
    ******************
    Not true. The team lost most of their money when their investment portfolio went tits up because of the market. For those of you who are too lazy to look it up, here’s what Forbes had to say:
    The Green Bay Packers net income fell 80% last year, to $4 million, due in large part to a $50 million decrease in the value of its investment portfolio. It is believed most of the team’s investments are in stocks and real estate. But the team’s balance sheet remains rock-solid with shareholders’ equity of $233 million and total liabilities of just $65 million.

  27. SlawPaw says: Jun 19, 2010 2:24 PM

    The owners need to be making more than this. They shoulder all of the financial risk, while the players get paid in 5 years what most will not make in a lifetime. Doing what you love and becoming famous are rewards as well. I don’t wanna hear about the recession. This game is more popular than ever. They shouldn’t be making more than the stockholders.

  28. bluestree says: Jun 19, 2010 2:31 PM

    leshon42 says:
    June 19, 2010 12:42 PM
    De’Smith b prepared to b booed out of the frozen tundra no way the fans side with you !!
    If you love pro football and the Packers then I think this is exactly the wrong attitude to take. The continued sucess of the league depends on reaching a labor agreement that is fair to both sides. I’m less than certain that Smith is the right man for the job, but it’s his job at this point so I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt till this plays out.
    One thing you need to take into account about the owners, and I don’t include NFL management in this, but they are looking to make money, and in some cases, maximize their profits, possibly at the expense of the game itself. That’s what got revenue sharing off the ground in the first place, the realization that some owners would damage the sport in order to make more money. Thankfully, wiser heads prevailed.
    But as was stated earlier on PFT as relates a different situation “It’s the latest example of the acceptance of lying as a standard business practice in NFL organizations.”
    I left Wisconsin a long time ago, but growing up I remember a place where the citizens had respect for labor and the quality of life that fairness in labor practices produced. If De Smith was booed because he represented the players it would be disheartening and disappointing.
    “It will also be an opening for De Smith to thank the Green Bay Packers for their openess and candor. He then can call for all franchises to do what the Green Bay Packers have done; open the books for the world to see.”
    Kudos, Bob.

  29. bluestree says: Jun 19, 2010 2:39 PM

    SlawPaw says:
    June 19, 2010 2:24 PM
    The owners need to be making more than this. They shoulder all of the financial risk, while the players get paid in 5 years what most will not make in a lifetime
    Explain to me, please, the risk of owning an NFL franchise? Also, most NFL players don’t play for five years, and don’t make millions, risk breaking their necks…..

  30. montanabob says: Jun 19, 2010 2:45 PM

    Dude who ‘hates florio’ you probably watch fox news and bust nut when glen becks on. You want someone to hate turn on fox you loser. Media members are to often pussies bound by the bull shit journalism code of ethics and more often than not the corprorate agenda their parent companies push.
    Florio is in a situation that many reporters envy; he can report and have a opinion. Agree with it or not it adds to the usually stale world of news.
    Hate florio? But still follow regularily? Loser!

  31. montanabob says: Jun 19, 2010 2:49 PM

    Dude who ‘hates florio’ you probably watch fox news and bust nut when glen becks on. You want someone to hate turn on fox you loser. Media members are to often pussies bound by the bull shit journalism code of ethics and more often than not the corprorate agenda their parent companies push.
    Florio is in a situation that many reporters envy; he can report and have a opinion. Agree with it or not it adds to the usually stale world of news.
    Hate florio? But still follow regularily? Loser!

  32. Lurch says: Jun 19, 2010 2:55 PM

    Are all viking fans this ignorant, or do we just have a few high schoolers without summer jobs writing comments here?
    You purples can’t seem to figure out a way to build a decent stadium, have a difficult time even selling out your home games on a consistent basis … and are in danger of seeing your team shipped to the west coast.
    Meanwhile, Lambeau has been remodeled, has events and attractions that keep it open 365 days a year … has a waiting list of 79,000 for season tickets. And now, we’re seeing the beginnings of plans to increase seating capacity from 72,000+ to perhaps 80,000.
    Keep sucking on the business end of your original whizzinators you purple goofs … that’s all you’ve got. Packer Envy baby!!! Packer Envy!

  33. PackFansLikeSheep says: Jun 19, 2010 3:44 PM

    Word on the street is that the Packers are going broke because Ted Thompson has been embezzling from the team for the last couple years, this is also why he refuses to improve the team by signing impact free agents. Every time an interviewer questions him about this he just puts on his feather boa and starts belting out show tunes. He is under alot of pressure and is said to be drinking heavily.

  34. east96street. says: Jun 19, 2010 3:46 PM

    Raise the price of beer and sausages and the Packers profits will triple.

  35. vanhelsing says: Jun 19, 2010 4:56 PM

    the economy is in the crapper, osamabama is printing worthless money 24/7.
    when he loses some maneuvering room in november, he will torch everything.
    a lot of people dont have the spending money they used to have.
    and duh smith is an osamabama clone.

  36. I HATE mike florio says: Jun 19, 2010 5:17 PM

    Montanabob.. You talk a big game on the computer, I would guess you are some fat 40 yo. sitting on your sheep farm in good old Montana .I dont watch fox or beck so your dumbass is wrong there. I cant stand bloggers like florio that just throw crap against the “wall” and see if it sticks. Moron

  37. footballrulz says: Jun 19, 2010 5:32 PM

    Wow–If only my company’s operating profit could fall from 34 mill to 20 mill.

  38. Old School says: Jun 19, 2010 7:57 PM

    Smith would be a better fit at a SEIU meeting.

  39. runtheball says: Jun 19, 2010 8:43 PM

    Operating profit has nothing to do with investment income!

  40. HC says: Jun 21, 2010 12:07 PM

    @ Jimmy Smith:
    You get exposed for having your facts wrong, so you resort to name calling. That’s real mature; what are you, twelve years old?
    By the way, revenue and profit are two completely different things. A drop in sales of $9 million would probably result in a loss of less than $2 million in net profit, assuming a place of business such as that typically runs at about 20% net profit.
    Even though that (same store sales) is a very significant dropoff in revenue, it does not explain the $14 million drop in net profit.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!