Skip to content

The potential implications of the Packers' financial report

Over the next couple of weeks, there will be plenty of talk about the Packers’ most recent annual report. 

So why wait? 

The basic numbers were released on Wednesday, and PFTV takes a look at what it all means.

 
Permalink 30 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Green Bay Packers, Rumor Mill, Top Stories
30 Responses to “The potential implications of the Packers' financial report”
  1. mattgso says: Jul 16, 2010 10:09 AM

    How would you like to be the Packers’ CFO right now? Imagine the internal and external scrutiny!

  2. pondbridge says: Jul 16, 2010 10:15 AM

    A managed number. As the only publicly-traded NFL team, the Packers’ profit numbers take on huge symbolic importance but are meaningless. Would be interesting to see what the numbers would be if the team was up for sale. The truth is somewhere in between.

  3. Bob Nelson says: Jul 16, 2010 10:17 AM

    Mike you are so wrong. The Packers have been one of the better teams in local revenues.
    1) The Packers have had to contribute to NFL Supplemental Revenue Sharing like the Cowboys and Redskins!! They are giving aid to poor poor franchises.
    2) Forbes magazine tries every year to do estimates. The Packers always do well there.
    3) The Packers always tell everyone where they rank financially in the NFL. When we last heard they were 12th in the NFL.
    Mike if the Packers shared revenue fully they would lose their financial advantages!!
    They have the 11th largest stadium and are always sold out.
    They have had the best sales at the local Pro Shop of any team in the league.
    The Packers are far better off than most NFL teams.
    Why Mr Florio are you so ignorant of one of the most open and publicized franchises??!!
    Do you not retain what what is put out publicly in your blog??
    Do you have blinders on when information is out there available to you??
    When the Packers are moving their practice fields, buying land around the Lambeau Field, installing new surfaces on practice fields and stadium, etc. these capital expenditures are announced.
    Instead of speaking on things you have not reseached or even been informed about, why say ignorant things??!!!
    Where Mike Florio in your prejudiced mind, would the Packers be hurting in local revenue??!!
    You will find you are incorrect.

  4. kinghill says: Jul 16, 2010 10:18 AM

    Floria: How can a reporter tell owners what to do? You have not worked to build what they have. Additionally, if revenues are shared equally you have the Obama Communist model. No wonder you like that idea! Why not pay all the players the same amount of money? That would produce a great product wouldn’t it? Tell Richard Seymore, Donovan McNabb, Peyton Manning and the rest of the high priced guys to share the wealth. Most of the players love Obama so I’m sure they would support re-distribution of their wealth. Maybe every team could go 8 and 8! Wouldn’t that be exciting to watch! Think of the possibilities.

  5. craigolney says: Jul 16, 2010 10:45 AM

    NFL teams only split the General admission tickets 32 ways, that is why there are so many new stadiums with premium seating since that is not shared.

  6. robert ethen says: Jul 16, 2010 10:55 AM

    Green Bay is the drunk, pot bellied, bald headed, orphan of the NFL.

  7. QB1 says: Jul 16, 2010 10:57 AM

    Florio. You and your cohort look like the nerdy guys in high school who put together a sports show to cover local sports for a video production class.

  8. PurpleNGold says: Jul 16, 2010 11:11 AM

    If the Packers were to invest in professional football players, in a few years they might see some returns.

  9. twizzlystick says: Jul 16, 2010 11:16 AM

    Don’t worry Bob Nelson, it’s always darkest before the dawn. Maybe they’ll come up with some solution to save the Packers.

  10. mnplsjunk says: Jul 16, 2010 11:18 AM

    Get a grip Bob Nelson. No one is saying disband the Green Bay Packers. No one is saying they are not competing financially against other NFL franchises. Seriously, what is wrong with you?
    The entire arguement is that the Green Bay Packers released their earnings and those reports indicate that the current model is unsustainable.
    The team’s financial report shows $258 million in revenue in 2009-2010, but operating expenses were 248 million, and it was mainly due to player costs.
    They also reported that players costs are increasing 11 percent annually while revenue is growing at a 5 percent rate.
    Is that sustainable?
    Profit from operations was $9.8 million, compared to $20.1 million in 2008-09.
    THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT!

  11. twizzlystick says: Jul 16, 2010 11:21 AM

    How could Ted Thompson not have known all this was gonna happen when he traded away Favre? I still say the Vikes should give Thompson a share of their playoff $$, he has definitely earned it.

  12. mnplsjunk says: Jul 16, 2010 11:22 AM

    And one more thing, Bob Nelson.
    The Green Bay Packers are the only team that has to disclose this type of financial information.
    Therefore, it is safe to assume that the Green Bay Packers unsustainable model is probably just a little bit more sustainable than many other teams.
    But, it is also safe to assume that most NFL teams are all in the same boat.
    That is….if you want to believe everything the Owners have to say.

  13. RealMenDONTWearPurple says: Jul 16, 2010 11:38 AM

    Robert, Why must you describe yourself like that?
    Ok, back to football…

  14. turkeyfunk says: Jul 16, 2010 11:39 AM

    kinghill:
    FYI: the NFL already shares revenues more than any other league, with all of the big network/directTV contracts split equally. plus, league parity has always been one of the goals of the NFL, hence the salary basement/cap…
    nevertheless, keep your political views to yourself, while you are busy cleaning your gun and looking at pictures of your (1st) cousin, this is a SPORTS blog…

  15. kinghill says: Jul 16, 2010 11:49 AM

    turkeyfunk: So you want all the players paid the same wage? That’s where we’re headed as a country, even if you’re in denial. Why should the NFL be the only non socialist entity in America?

  16. PurpleNGold says: Jul 16, 2010 12:08 PM

    @ kinghill
    The person responsible for the most campaign money raised from big business for his party is now our president. The person responsible for the second most campaign money raised from big business for her party is now our secretary of state. Big business makes our laws and then freely breaks them. Communism is on the opposite end of this theoretical spectrum, and for practical purposes it has been a myth since the early 90’s.
    Are you a member of the republican-funded domestic terrorist organization known as the Tea Party a.k.a. Al Teada a.k. a. The Tealiban?

  17. The Real Shuxion says: Jul 16, 2010 12:26 PM

    # robert ethen says: July 16, 2010 10:55 AM
    Green Bay is the drunk, pot bellied, bald headed, orphan of the NFL.
    —————————————————————
    They are basically hicks minus the speed addiction. They replaced it with butter wrapped in bacon wrapped in melted cheese stuffed a taco shell.

  18. srackis says: Jul 16, 2010 12:58 PM

    http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Loss-of-NFL-revenue-sharing-would-hit-teams-like-Minnesota-Vikings-in-the-wallet-65948288
    Hey Vikings fans, check out this article before you submit any more posts! Excerpts:
    The Vikings consistently have ranked at or near the bottom in revenue among the 32 teams, according to Lester Bagley, the Vikings’ vice president of public affairs and stadium development.
    Bagley says the Vikings generate $30 million less in revenue than each of its NFC North rivals — Detroit, Chicago and Green Bay — which have upgraded or built new stadiums in the past decade.
    “It’s unthinkable to think that you’ve got the market you got here — 3 1/2 million people — and have teams like Kansas City and Green Bay subsidizing the market,” Jones said then. “That’s going to stop.”
    So, the Packers are still paying Lord Favre’s salary!

  19. srackis says: Jul 16, 2010 1:03 PM

    More on the Vikings:
    http://www.allbusiness.com/sports-recreation/professional-sports-sports-revenues/13647436-1.html
    Excerpts: Dec. 24–If the NFL has its way, the Vikings might be hard-pressed to make a Brett Favre-caliber signing in 2011, the assistant executive director of the NFL Players Association told the Pioneer Press on Wednesday.
    “The Vikings are the prime example of a team that benefits from the salary-cap
    system and from the revenue-sharing system,” said George Atallah, the assistant executive director of the NFL Players Association. “The two (go) hand in hand.”
    The Pioneer Press reported earlier this month that the Vikings have received $15 million to $20 million a season through revenue sharing. The Vikings signed Favre to a two-year, $25 million contract in August.
    Atallah found it especially interesting that the Vikings received a portion of their revenue-sharing funds from their biggest rival, the Green Bay Packers, thanks primarily to the Packers’ extra income from revamped Lambeau Field in Green Bay.
    “The irony of this whole scenario is because Green Bay was actually not one of the bottom eight teams this year or the year before, they may have contributed to the supplemental revenue-sharing pool, which — guess what — helped the Vikings sign Brett Favre,” Atallah said.

  20. srackis says: Jul 16, 2010 1:13 PM

    http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/teamrankings
    Welcome to ESPN The Magazine’s eighth annual Ultimate Standings, in which we measure how much MLB, NBA, NFL and NHL franchises give back to the fans in exchange for all the time, money and emotion the fans invest in them.
    Packers are 9th; Vikings 59th, and these rankings come from the All Favre All The Time Network!

  21. bringbacktheflex says: Jul 16, 2010 1:13 PM

    Players are overpaid. Florio is the perfect example of the irresponsible frat-boy mentality of the typical idiot football fan: “Pay MY players anything they want so I can pretend I’m better than some other fan when they win”.
    Players are overpaid, pure and simple. And ALL UNIONS are corrupt and unrealistic, and the NFL is no exception. It’s time the owners put their foot down and said, “You’ll play for a reasonable salary or go get a real job with your college ‘degree’. See you at the local burger joint.”

  22. ftcsubs says: Jul 16, 2010 1:15 PM

    I would think that Greenbay is a upper echelon franchise. they have the largest fan base in the country, they always sellout. they are always in the top of sells for jerseys. so to say they are the low end of franchises. I believe that to be very skewed. they are at least a top 10 franchise if not higher. look at buffalo, Jacksonville, cincy etc I think that they are the bottom feeders. they could be losing money. how much does the owner make per year. should it be less than that of the players. you look at the owners of micro soft and other industries. there is a much bigger disparity there. I don’t get why we pay our athletes so much. why we as a customer has to payout 500 to 700 bucks to go enjoy a game. I don’t know what the solution is. but i know that the athletes of today make way to much money, and complain that they have to work 9 months out of the year. I wouldn’t mind making 16 million a year to only work 9 to 10 months out of the year.

  23. srackis says: Jul 16, 2010 1:20 PM

    Rookie Wage Scale!

  24. ClayMath52 says: Jul 16, 2010 1:20 PM

    This is no big deal. Player costs increase as players get better and the Packers re-sign them. The model would be unsustainable if our players kept getting better and better and required higher contracts without the factor that ultimately requires teams to cut/trade aging players with huge contracts . A team that is set up to be Super Bowl contenders will reap great financial rewards if they make it to a Super Bowl, or god willing WIN.

  25. dbartdog says: Jul 16, 2010 1:39 PM

    If I hear correct…Florio seems to cry a little for the millionaire players…Mike, just curious…what’s your feelings on the everyday worker getting squeezed by your precious GOP?????????????

  26. twizzlystick says: Jul 16, 2010 1:57 PM

    It sounds like everything just spiralled out of control for the Packers after Favre left. Their revenue plummetted so they became too broke to add the free agents they would have needed to make up for Ted Thompson’s bad drafting so the combination of always finishing behind the Vikings and not winning any playoff games plus no Favre jerseys to sell anymore left them in a huge hole they haven’t been able to climb out of. Maybe they can somehow turn things around but it will be a challenge.

  27. srackis says: Jul 16, 2010 1:59 PM

    ftscubs
    They are 9th amongst all baseball, football, basketball, and hockey franchises. #3 when just looking at the NFL
    1. New Orleans Saints 1 4 5 33 18 44 7 2 3
    2. Indianapolis Colts 4 8 6 9 39 8 3 46 3
    3. Green Bay Packers 9 40 10 8 11 2 12 51 16
    4. Arizona Cardinals 19 9 44 66 36 18 33 7 50
    5. Baltimore Ravens 20 43 34 5 38 19 13 27 18
    6. Pittsburgh Steelers 28 24 98 4 40 34 38 36 3
    7. Houston Texans 32 48 21 23 49 15 28 62 58
    8. Atlanta Falcons 36 39 42 17 41 95 42 17 53
    9. Tennessee Titans 37 30 61 62 33 72 48 14 61
    10. Carolina Panthers 39 20 62 41 50 74 60 61 51

  28. bluestree says: Jul 16, 2010 3:29 PM

    The Packers have scrubbed this report as much as they can to make it look dire. The NFL has a rule preventing public ownership of any more teams because they do not want anyone, including each other, to know what they make.
    If they were all hurting like they say, they could show their books and that would be that.
    But, besides the players, that would open up a can of worms amongst the owners because some have so much sweeter deals than others, the fans would clearly see how some of their teams make money by not trying to win, and you can bet some would be in trouble with the IRS.
    Remember Raiders rule #1 “If you’re not cheating, youre not trying hard enough.” Al Davis made that up. He’s an owner.

  29. PurpleNGold says: Jul 16, 2010 3:55 PM

    @ bringbacktheflex
    You can thank the unions for a five-day work week. Life was better for most of the people of this country when the unions were strong. You can thank Ronald Ray-Gun for convincing us that this was not the case.

  30. bucc19 says: Jul 17, 2010 10:23 AM

    I think all the Packers have to do is find the IP addresses of all the trolls printing slander on this website and sue the shit out of them..problem solved.

Leave a Reply

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