PDA

View Full Version : 2001 Financial Data For MLB


joecrede
12-22-2003, 03:36 PM
Financial data for MLB 2001. Make of these what you will.

Gate Receipts (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/20011207pappas.html)
Local Media Revenue (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/20011212pappas.html)
Other Revenue (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/20011220pappas.html)
Player Compensation (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/20020112pappas.html)

habibharu
12-22-2003, 03:40 PM
wow chisox #6 in local media revenue

BeerHandle
12-22-2003, 03:47 PM
Is there 2002 or 2003 info?

joecrede
12-22-2003, 03:49 PM
2001 was the latest made public (that I could find.)

SSN721
12-22-2003, 03:50 PM
I didnt know the Sox got a bigger share of media money than the Cubs, that is quite suprising to me. :o:

poorme
12-22-2003, 04:02 PM
That's called creative accounting by WGN and the Cubs.

thepaulbowski
12-22-2003, 04:07 PM
Originally posted by poorme
That's called creative accounting by WGN and the Cubs.


Extremely creative, they probably count it as WGN revenue and not the Cubs revenue.

habibharu
12-22-2003, 04:11 PM
yeah good point about the cubs but still sox ahead of dodgers,indians,orioles,phillies. thats amazing

kittle42
12-22-2003, 04:31 PM
Originally posted by habibharu
yeah good point about the cubs but still sox ahead of dodgers,indians,orioles,phillies. thats amazing

Hence the "self-imposed" part of "self-imposed $58 million budget."

TornLabrum
12-22-2003, 05:56 PM
Interesting numbers. Total revenues, according to these figures, are somewhere around $87 million (just doing a little quick addition in my head.).

cornball
12-22-2003, 06:16 PM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
Interesting numbers. Total revenues, according to these figures, are somewhere around $87 million (just doing a little quick addition in my head.).

Very interesting considering the 66 million payroll/salaries mentioned at that time.

Great comment in there, how owners despite crying of losing money....want to stay in the business (ala Montreal owner to Florida) and their teams value continues to rise. I wonder why that is?

joecrede
12-22-2003, 06:30 PM
I came across another part.

National & Other Local Expenses (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/20020124pappas.html)

AMestan
12-22-2003, 08:35 PM
joecrede,

Thanks for the info. I don't read USA Today and after reading the report, the numbers reported verify what many Sox fans have already had known without the proof. Jerry's self imposed budget is cushioned for zero sum just in case the team totally stinks. If the team does better then the dollars and forecast intended, Jerry makes money, the partners are happy and the entire process starts again next year. Too bad they didn't have the net worth of Jerry's powerful partners. Some of his partners can buy out over half the owners in MLB on personal wealth alone. I hope someone sends this information to the Sun Times or Tribune so everyone knows the real intent of the mediocre management we have to deal with on an annual basis.

Thanks again for the info.

joecrede
12-22-2003, 09:22 PM
The numbers show for 2001 the Sox were 17th in payroll in MLB and 17th in revenue.

soxfan26
12-23-2003, 02:30 AM
Great Article, thanks for posting it.


Player salaries are investments. A team that spends its money wisely wins more games, and in any market, a winning team means higher attendance and more public interest which ultimately translates to larger media contracts and more money for the owner.


Sounds like this came straight from Daver or Lip. If that is true doesn't it just make you want to jump for joy at the thought of tendering Schoeneweis a contract?


Conversely, a team perceived as too cheap to sign quality players will alienate its fans and have less to spend.


Oh woe is me... :gulp:

SSN721
12-23-2003, 07:59 AM
Originally posted by joecrede
I came across another part.

National & Other Local Expenses (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/20020124pappas.html)

Very interesting numbers, thanks a lot for that report. I guess Jerry is already planning on less attendence this year considering his self imposed budget is 3 mil less then the money he has left over after paying non-player expenses. He probably has a good idea by now of exactly how much to spend to get a marginal profit each year since he always seems to field a .500 team plus or minus a few every year. God forbid he and his partners kick in an extra 10-15 mil just to give it a shot and see if raising attendence after winning or good expectations see higher gate reciepts and he may end up still making his 2-3 million in profit. Anyway, certainly didnt mean to start that argument again. Just very depressing :(:

CLR01
12-23-2003, 08:42 AM
Originally posted by SSN721
Very interesting numbers, thanks a lot for that report. I guess Jerry is already planning on less attendence this year considering his self imposed budget is 3 mil less then the money he has left over after paying non-player expenses. He probably has a good idea by now of exactly how much to spend to get a marginal profit each year since he always seems to field a .500 team plus or minus a few every year. God forbid he and his partners kick in an extra 10-15 mil just to give it a shot and see if raising attendence after winning or good expectations see higher gate reciepts and he may end up still making his 2-3 million in profit. Anyway, certainly didnt mean to start that argument again. Just very depressing :(:


Those numbers are from 2001 and according to the numbers I saw JR lost a little more than $5.5 million that season. The wildcards in that article were TV/Radio contracts (dont know where he would be hiding that, unlike the Cubs he does not own a TV network). Also the local revenue and we will probably never know wat JR's cut of things like parking and concessions is.

SSN721
12-23-2003, 08:48 AM
Originally posted by CLR01
Those numbers are from 2001 and according to the numbers I saw JR lost a little more than $5.5 million that season. The wildcards in that article were TV/Radio contracts (dont know where he would be hiding that, unlike the Cubs he does not own a TV network). Also the local revenue and we will probably never know wat JR's cut of things like parking and concessions is.

Sorry about that, I foolishly failed to notice the year when I wrote the post despite it being in the thread title. Guess its still a little too early for me to write intelligent posts. :D:

joecrede
12-23-2003, 01:15 PM
The $111,600,000 in revenue the report states for the Sox in 2001 takes into account local and national TV revenues.

The report shows the following rankings for the Sox:

Payroll: 17th ($66M)
Revenue: 17th ($111.7M)
Non-player expenses: 15th ($50.6M)

If you accept these numbers the White Sox will have to increase revenues in order to increase payroll. In other words, if JR is hiding money so to is his competing owners.

ewokpelts
12-23-2003, 03:20 PM
The Sox control the parking lots, and pay Standard Parking to handle game day parking. The United center has a similar deal with standard parking. That's why the sox/bulls/hawks charge discount parking to season ticket holders, cuz they are only paying for the day of game purchases.
Gene