Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Rodgers contract discussion
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="HardRightEdge" data-source="post: 781295"><p>There could be a variety of reasons that the CFO would have to explain. Since the Raiders have not yet moved, not yet having "taken delivery" on the contract as it were, their fee may not yet be treated as earned in full or in part. Maybe the Rams and Chargers are not deemed fully relocated until they occupy their new stadium so a part of their contract is not deemed executed. Or perhaps this windfall is treated on a cash received basis, not accrual, since the relocation contracts are with the NFL, Inc., not the individual teams. Or perhaps there are contingencies in the contract that make the final amounts somewhat variable and are thereby deferred. It's hard to say. The NFL, Inc. surely has a cadre of CPAs and tax attorneys interpreting accounting rules and tax law that handle issues like the timing of revenue recongition which is anything but straight forward, passing their interpretations down to the teams.</p><p></p><p>We do know a couple of things.</p><p></p><p>First, the $55 million is a one time (or two times, as it were) enhancement to revenue and earnings. In trying to project future operating earnings power, it's best to look at the past trend without that money. At the same time expenses went up $44 million some of which Murphy seemed to suggest related to temporary issues like coaching and depreciation expenses. In any case, if you back out the $27 mil from the prior year, earnings went up $7 mil year over year <s>What's odd is if you back the $27 mil out of revenue, then revenue actually went down. </s> while revenue went up about $40 mil excluding the $27 million relocation windfall. In any event, looking forward, it's best to think of the $55 mil as a cash add to the balance sheet rather than part of the earnings trend.</p><p></p><p>Second, "Murphy said player expenses tend to be cyclical, rising and falling with new contracts." Now, we know cap is not cyclical, it's been up, up and then up for decades. He's talking about cash disbursements being cyclical which would be chiefly signing bonuses. That he would comment on it tells you the variability of of those outlays from a cash management standpoint is viewed as material. I'm sure he's thinking about the possibility of the mother of all signing bonues and it's cash outlay hitting "soon".</p><p></p><p>Third, while I'm still not finding this most recent annual report, the prior year's balance sheet showed $397 million in cash and investments. It's easy to say, for example, "Rewrite Rodgers last 2 years, give him a $100 mil signing bonus and $1 million salary in 2018, for a net additional cash outlay of $80 mil this year. However, we don't know what portion of those investments might be illiquid, have a large taxable capital gain attached to them, are earmarked for near term spending outside the football operation such as Titletown Phase II, or how much management deems prudent to hold sequestered as an emergency reserve such as for an event causing major damage to the stadium.</p><p></p><p>Fourth, perhaps none of that matters, the cash expense for Rodgers has been planned for, but like me they want to wait to see if the golden arm can still make all the throws in game action.</p><p></p><p>Or fifth, they want to see if they can win the Super Bowl this year after which they'll have established enough good will among fans to clear cap with the older star free agents let go as they move into rebuilding on the fly and Rodgers gets his money. If anybody thinks that's stupid, consider the last two share sales were done immediately after Super Bowl wins on the back of that good will.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="HardRightEdge, post: 781295"] There could be a variety of reasons that the CFO would have to explain. Since the Raiders have not yet moved, not yet having "taken delivery" on the contract as it were, their fee may not yet be treated as earned in full or in part. Maybe the Rams and Chargers are not deemed fully relocated until they occupy their new stadium so a part of their contract is not deemed executed. Or perhaps this windfall is treated on a cash received basis, not accrual, since the relocation contracts are with the NFL, Inc., not the individual teams. Or perhaps there are contingencies in the contract that make the final amounts somewhat variable and are thereby deferred. It's hard to say. The NFL, Inc. surely has a cadre of CPAs and tax attorneys interpreting accounting rules and tax law that handle issues like the timing of revenue recongition which is anything but straight forward, passing their interpretations down to the teams. We do know a couple of things. First, the $55 million is a one time (or two times, as it were) enhancement to revenue and earnings. In trying to project future operating earnings power, it's best to look at the past trend without that money. At the same time expenses went up $44 million some of which Murphy seemed to suggest related to temporary issues like coaching and depreciation expenses. In any case, if you back out the $27 mil from the prior year, earnings went up $7 mil year over year [S]What's odd is if you back the $27 mil out of revenue, then revenue actually went down. [/S] while revenue went up about $40 mil excluding the $27 million relocation windfall. In any event, looking forward, it's best to think of the $55 mil as a cash add to the balance sheet rather than part of the earnings trend. Second, "Murphy said player expenses tend to be cyclical, rising and falling with new contracts." Now, we know cap is not cyclical, it's been up, up and then up for decades. He's talking about cash disbursements being cyclical which would be chiefly signing bonuses. That he would comment on it tells you the variability of of those outlays from a cash management standpoint is viewed as material. I'm sure he's thinking about the possibility of the mother of all signing bonues and it's cash outlay hitting "soon". Third, while I'm still not finding this most recent annual report, the prior year's balance sheet showed $397 million in cash and investments. It's easy to say, for example, "Rewrite Rodgers last 2 years, give him a $100 mil signing bonus and $1 million salary in 2018, for a net additional cash outlay of $80 mil this year. However, we don't know what portion of those investments might be illiquid, have a large taxable capital gain attached to them, are earmarked for near term spending outside the football operation such as Titletown Phase II, or how much management deems prudent to hold sequestered as an emergency reserve such as for an event causing major damage to the stadium. Fourth, perhaps none of that matters, the cash expense for Rodgers has been planned for, but like me they want to wait to see if the golden arm can still make all the throws in game action. Or fifth, they want to see if they can win the Super Bowl this year after which they'll have established enough good will among fans to clear cap with the older star free agents let go as they move into rebuilding on the fly and Rodgers gets his money. If anybody thinks that's stupid, consider the last two share sales were done immediately after Super Bowl wins on the back of that good will. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
mradtke66
Latest posts
Cam Achord new ST coach - Fire him
Latest: OldSchool101
36 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2026 Roster Thread - Semi-Live
Latest: OldSchool101
Today at 2:53 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Wisky newbie
Latest: milani
Today at 2:09 PM
Introduce Yourself
Why I Love The 2026-2027 Green Bay Packers
Latest: OldSchool101
Today at 1:50 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Valuation of NFL Teams
Latest: milani
Today at 1:46 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Rodgers contract discussion
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
