Green Bay Packers Releasing Financial Data: Newest Shareholders Awash In Anticipation

ALLGBP.com All Green Bay Packers All the Time
The Packers will release their financial numbers on Tuesday.

Update: The Financial data has been released. The Packers’ operating profit skyrocketed from 12 million thye previuos fiscal year to 43 million over the last 12 months. Full details can be found on Packers.com.

Every year the Green Bay Packers are required to release the financial data of the NFL’s only publicly owned team, and this year is no different.  According to Mike Florio of ProFootballTalk.com, the Packers will release last year’s financial numbers Tuesday afternoon.

The report will straddle both 2011 and 2012, and according to Florio, the numbers will most likely show a revenue increase for Green Bay.  This is great news for Green Bay because despite the poor economy and playing in a smaller market, the Packers still show an increase.

However, the bigger issue is Florio, a respected media  member, and the overall attitude of many for how the Packers have reached their financial success.

Florio’s tone throughout the report would have you believe that the Packers are ripping people off by selling them stock that means absolutely nothing.  However, what Florio doesn’t, and honestly can’t, understand is the passion that Packers’ fans have for their beloved team.

Florio states that Green Bay raised $67 million by selling sheets of paper for $250 each.  What Florio calls a piece of paper, we call a piece of the franchise that we love.

Does it matter that the paper ultimately means nothing?  Does it matter that people who bought that stock doesn’t really have a say in the future of the team?

Of course not.

All that matters is the fact that those who purchased that stock are now part of the Packers.  Not literally, but every time they walk into their office or their living room, they see a piece of the Green Bay Packers.

No other fan of any other team in the NFL can say that.

 

 

  • cow42

    you can use he word “shareholder”… i’ll use “sucker”.

    and i live and breathe Packer football.

    would you donate $250 to Apple? guess you would as long as you got a fancy piece of paper back in the mail.

    scam.

    i know the Packers are essentially just a company trying to make $ but something about the idea of preying an peoples emotional ties to the team makes me a bit ill.

    guess there’s no limit to how far greed will go.

    • Oppy

      I’ll let you explain this “Greed” to me.

      Do you know the Packers are a not-for-profit?

      All those millions and millions of dollars of PROFIT after everone is paid… Where do you think it goes?

      I mean, if it was greed, someone would be pocketing that money, right?

      All other teams, you could claim GREED because there is an owner getting rich pocketing the profits. That’s not the case. THe money is either set aside to an emergency fund (in case of future financial hardships, the Packers can lean on the rainy day fund), placed in the Packers’ investment portfolios (To help grow that rainy day fund), injected into facility/stadium improvements, or pumped into local charities and organizations/programs which give back to the community.

      I guess if by “Greed” you mean those things, then by all means, the Packers are greedy bastards.

      • cow42

        call me a skeptic, but you’d be hard-pressed to convince me that a bunch of really rich people didn’t just get a whole lot richer.

        and all major sports teams give money to community and charity. stop making the Packers out to be saints.

        the business wanted more money so it sold fancy paper for $250. those are the facts.

        • Oppy

          Be as skeptical as you want.. You can read each year’s financial reports.

          • Turophile

            Cow42. If you want to buy a certificate, why not. Its not like anyone is hiding is ‘value’, or that people are feeling they didn’t get what they paid for.

            They KNOW what they are getting. They understand its value, whether that is monetary, sentimental, symbolic, or simply as a way to attend (and sometimes vote) at shareholder meetings.

    • PissesoffinAZ

      “would you donate $250 to Apple?”

      If you bought an IPod, IPhone or IPad, you did donate to Apple. Then you probably spent hundreds of dollars on ITunes for music, much of which disappeared from your library (tough luck! Shoulda backed it up!), and let’s not forget apps, insurance, and of course, replacing the broken/obsolete/stolen/lost “I”tems.

      I would rather “waste” $250 on my Made in the USA team than spend it to underpay a bunch of exploited workers in China.

  • Tarynfor12

    There will always be those that never understand and say you are being preyed upon through your emotions.

    Is it an emotion that had me buy into the sale of stock for $250 dollars that offers no financial return…absolutely.

    Is it emotion that has me buy into the hope that ST Judes Hospital does for children knowing I get no financial return…abolutely.

    Both need emotional donations to survive.

    I want those children to live and I want the Packers to survive.

    As long as my emotions can help…I’ll be there in any way I’m able.

    • steve cheez

      And don’t forget all that $$ I spend on jewelry for Mrs. Steve Cheez. I get no return on that (and I mean, no return). And yet, somehow I keep doing it…

  • Ed

    Florio is an idiot who does not even understand what non-traded common stock means. He does not believe Packer stockholders have voting rights, but they do. Packer stockholder votes forced a change in the bylaws after the 1997 sale (they changed which charity gets the payout in case of a liquidation of the team), they have forced changes in the Board of Directors, and most importantly, they prevented the liquidation and/or movement of the team on at least 3 occasions (1925, 1934, and 1950). Complaints by shareholders also influenced changes in football operations on two occasions — 1959 (Vince Lombardi) and 1991 (Ron Wolf). Note that this record is *way* more influence than the shareholders of amny publicly traded companies have been able to exert. Packer stock is much more than ‘just a piece of colored paper.’

    Florio doesn’t get that because he thinks of stock as something you put in a brokerage portfolio — he is stuck on the idea that a stock is something you trade with other people to make money. That is a speculator’s definition of stock and thinking it’s the only definition leads to economic disasters like the Market crashes of 1929 and 2008. But that is not what stock really is — stock is ownership of a company so you can have a voice in the way the company does business, they way PAcker shareholders ahve had a voice since the 1920s.

    Florio also doesn’t realize that corporations can have purposes besides making money for speculators. The first ‘corporations’ in the world were monasteries in Medieval Europe which had as their purpose praying for the souls of the dead. (My degree is in medieval history. Those monks also invented franchising). In the modern world coporations also exist for many purposes other than making money for speculators — coporations exist to provide public services (that’s why its an *incorporated* village or town), make and sell a product or service, share risk (the word Mutual in insurance company names indicates that they are *policyholder* owned), and even provide charity. Many such corporations use stock to keep track of their ownership shares even though itis not publicly traded on an exchange.

    The Packers exist to operate a football team in the town of Green Bay. The Packers happen to organize their ownership records by the distribution of stock, rather than the allocation of partnership shares, but if another team wanted to count their ownership percentages in stock shares it would change nothing about their operations — the Patriots, for example, would just have some huge percentage of shares belonging to Robert Kraft and smaller amounts to other minority owners. The other teams can add owners and redistribute ownership percentages the same way the Packers do. Yes for other teams to change ownership that way requires a vote of the other NFL owners to approve the new people — just the same way the Packers had to get a vote of approval from the NFL to sell more stock.

    What Florio and his ilk really object to is that the NFL allows the Packers, unlike other teams, to operate without a majority owner (50%+ of the stock). He doesn’t like this because the Packers ownership historically has not made as many of the stupid decisions that some egotistical majority owners (Jones, Snyder, et al.) have inflicted on their teams. So basically these nitpickers are jealous that the Packers are able to use the most successful model of organization in history — the stock company with multiple, widespread ownership that elects a Board to run the company — to operate a clearly superior NFL Franchise. Florio and his fellow whiners think that is unfair, but if it really were, the rest of the NFL owners could force the Packers to change at any time the other owners put together enough votes. Seems like the NFL owners together have more sense than to go and destroy their brand like that, as well as recognizing that all they have to do to be more successful than the packers is make better business and football decisions.

    No I am not myself a stockholder, but I’ll never look down on those who put their money to keeping the Packers in Green Bay on a permanent basis — the real point to jkeeping a majority fo the stock in the hands of regular fans. And I go one step further — I’ll bet the people who pay for the stock get as much enjoyment out of being stockholders and having a brightly colored piece of paper as anybody else who paid $250 for an ooverpriced game worn jersey, or something. Memorabilia value alone justifies paying for the souvenier stock certificate, but the actual value of participating in your team’s decsion making, even in the smallest way, has value on top of that that shuills like Florio will never understand.

    • Chad Toporski

      Bravo! Well said!

      • Ed

        Thanks Chad. Some of those points have been weighing on me for a while (but I’ll bet you could tell that!)

    • Oppy

      Technically, the Packers organization itself, and the board members, are majority stock holders.

      This is why we minority stock holders don’t have any real power to influence business decisions.

      We DO have a REAL vote, but we don’t have enough numbers to sway any decision for or against. We are an insignificant number, technically speaking.

      • Ed

        Except that ‘technically a minority’ did get the board change to have newer shareholders on the board, and changed the bylaws back in 1997.

        So the ‘minority’ shareholders had that much power, at least twice.

        As far as the guys on the board voting a majority of the shares, that is no different than *any* corporation in the US — every single corporate board normally controls the votes of most of the shares because shareholders who are satisfied give their proxies to the board to vote.

        The only time shareholders vote against the board is when they are dissatisfied with the way the team is being run. Then they don’t sent their proxies to the board and either show up to vote themselves or give their proxy to someone who will vote the way they like.

        What is dissatisfying about the way the Packers are being run in 2012? Can you convince a nmajority of shareholders to agree with you and give you their proxies?

        And if you aren’t dissatisfied, why would you want to voteagainst a successful board?

        But the main point is that this si exactly the same type and amount of power that ‘regular’ shareholders in every stock corporation in the US (or elsewhere) have.

    • Oppy

      Florio is a Vikings Fan.

      Therefore, Florio is a straight-up HATER.

      ‘Nuff said.

  • Jack Maverick

    Excellent article – You’re right, and Florio just doesn’t get it. As you pointed out in your concluding sentence, Green Bay fans have a unique relationship with their team, something that, as you noted, no other NFL fans can say.
    The loyal Packer fans come out and pack Lambeau full even during losing seasons and the worst weather imaginable. Compare them to, say, Dallas fans, many of whom abandon their stadium seats if the Cowboys just lose two in a row.

    • pissedoffinAZ

      Jack, I heard on the radio yesterday, that attendence has declined at games for the past decade. I screamed at the radio:
      “NOT IN GREEN BAY!”

  • Ron LC

    Revenues generated from the stock sale are being allocated to support the new end-zone construction. It was a well communicated reason given in conjunction with the anouncement of the sale. The additional seats and amenities will provide on-going revenue to support/pay for things like say Greg J and AR’s upcoming contracts. The forward thinking of Murphy and TT will keep the team viable for years to come.

    If that ass Florio wants to bitch he might want to figure out how Jones scammed the investors in his Taj. Oh that’s right he doesn’t get to see Dalas and Jones Balance Sheet. Too mush work for an idiot like Florio, I guess.

    • Ed

      Actually, no requirement for a privately held partnership like the Cowboys to ever provide their financial results to the general public.

      That’s the cost of operating as a publicly held stock corporation — you have to twll everybody and their dog how you did eachj and every year. The intent is to make sure that the people who run the corporation can be held accountable for their business decisions. Seems to be working as intended in Green Bay.

  • lebowski

    The Packers don’t have one billionaire owner. What they do have is the largest, most loyal fan base in sports. When they need funds to expand, they reach out to the community, and it’s well worth it to pitch in a bit so they can stay competitive. My wife and I are both ‘owners’, not so I can brag about being an NFL owner, but because we wanted to help the team out. Florio’s a huge Viking fan and a jackass.

    • Ed

      Lebowski, I’ll support to the end your description of Florio as a vulgar word meaning donkey, but be careful when you call him a Vikes fan — that could be taken as an insult! :-)

  • Mojo

    I never understand peoples consternation at those of us who have purchased Packer stock. We fully know what were getting and giving. No one is being duped.

    Does anyone get as riled up when someone spends money on a team pennant or any of thousand other souvenirs sports teams offer? When you think about it, everything we buy that is non-essential(food, shelter, clothes) could be considered a waste of money, with greedy outside manipulators taking advantage of us. That list could go on indefinitely.

    People like Florio, who express righteous indignation at the Pack, accusing them of taking advantage of others in these stock sales, hope to project some sense of moral superiority. I see right through it and their opinions actually make me think less of those who go that route.

  • Joe

    I feel privileged to be a owner of the ONLY PUBLICALLY OWNED MAJOR SPORTS FRANCHISE IN THE WORLD.

    • cow42

      “owner”… ha ha ha

  • alex parkhurst

    I waited my whole life (I’m now 65) to get to a point where I could afford a Packer share. My wife gave me the share at Christmas last year. She is a Bronco fan but realizes what it means to me. It is priceless. There is no “Value” in a share in most people’s eyes.

    I absolutely love telling people I am an NFL team owner, and I don’t care if I go to the annual meeting in my Gulfstream jet. Attending Packers games are just fine.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZZQexZbRkM Olin Mcclerkin

    less than really are a handful of hyper-inbound links to word wide web web sites we connect to as we think they basically are proficiently definitely well worth browsing