It has a lot to do with Khan. Those valuations also include infrastructure such as stadiums. Khan has invested a pretty penny in improving the stadium since he took over.
Those valuations also include take home profit outside of the shared revenue. The take home profit has also increased exponentially since Khan has established the London link with the Jaguars.

In our case the stadium has nothing to do with the valuation since it is 100% owned by the City.  The money Khan has invested in the stadium improves the gameday experience and helps sell tickets and increase profits but the capital expenditures (locker room upgrades, scoreboards, club seat improvements, amphitheater, etc.) are in essence donations to the City.

---

It has a lot to do with Khan. Those valuations also include infrastructure such as stadiums. Khan has invested a pretty penny in improving the stadium since he took over. Those valuations also include take home profit outside of the shared revenue. The take home profit has also increased exponentially since Khan has established the London link with the Jaguars.

 

 

The Jaguars were 32nd of 32 in 2011. The fact that they jumped 5 other teams means that it has to do with Khan and Caldwell and not just an across-the-board rise in value of NFL franchises.

 

My point is that there is no control to which to compare and given that all NFL teams increased in a value a significant amount it very difficult to attribute any causal effect. If the team was sold to someone else, would they have also done stadium improvements and agreed to the London link? Who knows.

 

I'm not saying Khan does not deserve some credit nor that I don't agree with what he has done. However, I don't think you definitely say he and his actions have definitely increased the wealth of the Jags beyond what would have happened most other circumstances. It is too soon to make that judgement.

 

Moreover, the entire process that Forbes does is a total false pretense. They are doing a Enterprise Valuation of NFL team that has no stock. Essentially this would be theoretical takeover price if the company were to buy out the public stock of a company. However, NFL teams don't have stock. They are not publicly shared. Which turns this into an educated guess as to what the market price of each team is. The balance sheets matter some, but that is only the jumping off point. It would entirely be based on the perception of the team. The current management and Khan have improved that, but who is to say others would not have also do so.

---

My point is that there is no control to which to compare and given that all NFL teams increased in a value a significant amount it very difficult to attribute any causal effect. If the team was sold to someone else, would they have also done stadium improvements and agreed to the London link? Who knows.

 

I'm not saying Khan does not deserve some credit nor that I don't agree with what he has done. However, I don't think you definitely say he and his actions have definitely increased the wealth of the Jags beyond what would have happened most other circumstances. It is too soon to make that judgement.

 

Moreover, the entire process that Forbes does is a total false pretense. They are doing a Enterprise Valuation of NFL team that has no stock. Essentially this would be theoretical takeover price if the company were to buy out the public stock of a company. However, NFL teams don't have stock. They are not publicly shared. Which turns this into an educated guess as to what the market price of each team is. The balance sheets matter some, but that is only the jumping off point. It would entirely be based on the perception of the team. The current management and Khan have improved that, but who is to say others would not have also do so.

 

Again, the Jags went from 32nd to 27th. If it was simply because of league wide increase in worth, then the Jaguars wouldn't have passed those 5 franchises. That aspect is unquestionably due to Khan and Caldwell.

---

In our case the stadium has nothing to do with the valuation since it is 100% owned by the City. The money Khan has invested in the stadium improves the gameday experience and helps sell tickets and increase profits but the capital expenditures (locker room upgrades, scoreboards, club seat improvements, amphitheater, etc.) are in essence donations to the City.

Well maybe the system Forbes used to determine the franchise value is flawed, but they do in fact include stadium value when determining the value of the franchise.


<a class="bbc_url" href='http://www.forbes.com/teams/jacksonville-jaguars/'>http://www.forbes.com/teams/jacksonville-jaguars/</a>

---

"Before you criticize a man, walk a mile in his shoes. That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away and barefoot."

Double your money in 5 years?

 

Sign me up.  Well done Shad.

---

In our case the stadium has nothing to do with the valuation since it is 100% owned by the City.  The money Khan has invested in the stadium improves the gameday experience and helps sell tickets and increase profits but the capital expenditures (locker room upgrades, scoreboards, club seat improvements, amphitheater, etc.) are in essence donations to the City.

 

The two sentences in bold seem to contradict each other quite sharply.  It's not just a "donation to the city" if it's increasing profit that reaches the owners wallet. 

 

Think of a restaurant owner improving a leased space to improve customer experience, thus improving revenue.  Same dynamic applies here. 

---