A little less than a year ago, the team signed a 12-year, $30-million deal for naming rights at the St. Pete Times Forum.
Then came the unexpected Stanley Cup playoff run and the revenues gained from five additional home games with near capacity crowds.
And now a property tax break provided by a circuit judge that should save the franchise more than $2-million a year.
Thus, with all these additional revenues coming its way, the Lightning is in an even stronger position to do what it does best:
Look for more revenues.
This appears to be the message from the Times Forum hierarchy this summer. Coming off its most successful season in franchise history, the Lightning is not ready to bring its payroll in line with the average NHL team. And despite recent financial windfalls, the team's parent company is insistent that more concessions must be gained.
All of which makes this a good time to ask:
Will it ever get better?
It has been four years since Palace Sports & Entertainment purchased the Lightning along with the lease at the Times Forum and, in the time since, much has gone well. Attendance is up. Sponsorships have grown. The team has become respectable. The arena is among the busiest in the concert industry.
Yet the message from Palace Sports officials is that money remains scarce.
Maybe, difficult as it is to believe, this is true. Attendance is not what it could be, and that is with lower prices and more ticket giveaways than many cities. And unlike NFL and Major League Baseball teams, which share tens of millions in national TV deals, NHL teams depend far more on gate receipts and local broadcast packages. But, at some point, the Lightning needs to reach a hand out to the community without expecting to have a dollar bill placed in it.
Yes, we understand local revenues are not up to par with the rest of the league. We also understand the Lightning does not pay rent at a facility built, in large part, with public funds. We understand the Lightning keeps all the profits from this building, including non-hockey events. We understand that most of our memories are of losing hockey teams and erratic management.
It is worth pointing out, again, this is not a slam dunk of a sports market. There is not enough disposable income, not enough corporations to tap. The populace has shallow roots and the teams have little history to bank on.
The only way hockey - or baseball, for that matter - will work in this market is as a partnership. That means the community must make allowances. It also means ownership must reciprocate.
This is the impasse we have reached.
The Lightning feels it has delivered on its promise of a better hockey team. Fans feel they have delivered on their promise of increased support.
So who makes the next move?
The Lightning is waiting for more season tickets to be sold. For government officials to turn over all available parking revenues.
Fans are waiting for the Lightning to prove it is not a one-hit wonder. For ownership to spend money on additional talent.
The fear is this critical moment of opportunity shall pass with neither side getting what it seeks, or needs. That we will be forever consigned to this vague domain of hockey purgatory.
"We feel we've made progress," Lightning president Ron Campbell said. "Incredible progress."
Yet here is the nagging thought:
What does it say when attendance has risen by about 5,000 fans per night, sponsorship money has taken a leap forward and ownership still is claiming to be operating in the red? If you believe the financial losses are real, then you might consider one of two possibilities.
Ownership either grossly miscalculated the market's potential before buying the team, or it has grossly mismanaged the club since.
Campbell did not go so far as to call the purchase a mistake but said Palace Sports officials were caught by surprise by the amount of work needed after the failed stewardship of two previous owners.
In other words, fans were incredibly skeptical.
"We did not realize how badly the earth had been scorched," Campbell said. "It's really hard (for a fan) to fall in love again when your heart is broken."
The new Lightning owners erroneously projected the gate revenues it would reap the first few seasons. They have been looking for ways to compensate ever since.
It is believed the average NHL team makes about $28-million a year from ticket sales. The Lightning was supposedly closer to $17-million last season.
Is this an impediment? Absolutely. But the Lightning needs to remember it gets a break with a rent-free building. Not to mention, most other markets have much higher labor costs. Maybe the tradeoff is not equal, but the Lightning should stop glossing over its advantages.
The great unknown, and the great hope, is a new collective bargaining agreement in 2004 will help low-revenue markets compete.
That, however, may be wishful thinking. A salary cap means asking players to give up potential earnings. Revenue sharing means asking richer owners to give up potential earnings. Anyone willing to bet on that kind of generosity?
So I'm not faulting the Lightning for looking under every county commissioner and behind every tax assessor for more funds. That's what smart business people do.
The problem is the perception. This team's image is of an absentee owner whose priorities are a winning NBA team in Detroit and a lower budget in Tampa Bay. The Lightning should stop arguing about the truthfulness of that perception and try changing it.
Share your windfall with your fans.
Don't spend stupidly, but don't risk missing out on a terrific chance to have this community fall in love with its team.
Keep looking for additional revenues, but try keeping it to yourself.
