PDA

View Full Version : Quote Of The Day 4/ 20


Lip Man 1
04-20-2004, 12:59 PM
*Yankees slugger Jason Giambi, on salaries: "That makes me laugh: greedy players. If fans saw what the [bleeping] owners make, they'd say, '[Players] don't make [bleeping] anything!' It's like Kevin Costner making $20 million a film. I work harder than he does.''-- Elliot Harris' column Chicago Sun-Times.

Now that's entertainment! LOL

Lip

wdelaney72
04-20-2004, 01:02 PM
Wow, Giambi is more of a dumbass than Big Frank!

That could go down as one of the dumbest comments ever.

Lip Man 1
04-20-2004, 01:08 PM
Why? I think he's nailed it completely correct. Don't get me wrong, players are very well paid for their work but when you look at it in the context of the entire entertainment industry and you see what folks like Tom Cruise, the Rolling Stones, Julia Roberts make and so on, athletes salaries aren't that unreasonable.

I always mention this to folks who start complaining about what Barry Bonds etc makes.

I'm all for reducing athletes salaries as long as you reduce salaries in the other entertainment venues as well.

Giambi's right....Cruise works three months on a movie and gets 35- 40 million?

Lip

sas1974
04-20-2004, 01:15 PM
I agree that if people actually knew what the owners were making, it would put a new perspective on the player's salaries.

The second portion of the quote is what kind of bugs me a little bit. It shows a complete inability to grasp reality. Who works harder for $20MM?!?!? Neither of you overpaid slobs do! $20MM to play the GAME of baseball? Or $20MM to dress up and play make believe? THAT'S not work!

Dadawg_77
04-20-2004, 01:17 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
*Yankees slugger Jason Giambi, on salaries: "That makes me laugh: greedy players. If fans saw what the [bleeping] owners make, they'd say, '[Players] don't make [bleeping] anything!' It's like Kevin Costner making $20 million a film. I work harder than he does.''-- Elliot Harris' column Chicago Sun-Times.

Now that's entertainment! LOL

Lip

The comment was taken from this month's Maxim. They have a feature story about what baseball needs to do to clean itself up. Basically the same ole things which have been repeated in numerous stories.

nlentz88
04-20-2004, 01:21 PM
Yeah, I bet Giambi works harder to earn $20 million than Kevin Costner does. However, there a thousands of migrant workers in this country who work eighteen hour days to earn two bucks while suffering all sorts of health and social problems. It's all relative, Jason.

People aren't paid a salary based upon how hard they work. They're paid a certain amount because of demand and the supply at hand. Just as the demand for a big name movie star like Costner means that he gets paid $20 million, so too does the demand for a player of Giambi's calibre dictate his salary. Likewise, the owners make profits based upon controlling the supply of baseball games while being respectful of the demand; what else is profit sharing about if not this? And since there are hundreds of thousands of immigrants in this country who are willing to work as migrant laborers, farmers can pay them less and less.

Yeah, what Giambi said is true. However, he needs to have a little more perspective on things. Anyone who annually makes seven or eight figures has no right to complain about money when children are going hungry in this country because they can't afford to eat.

The same goes for Big Frank and his recent bellyaching about his contract. I love Big Frank and think the media picks on him, but the guy needs to chill out about money. He's grown too accustomed to the rich life, and he blew too much money in his failed business ventures and divorce. He needs a reality check. There's nothing that says ball players MUST have two homes, four luxury cars, bling-bling and all the rest. Take your $8 million and shut up, Frank. Otherwise go out and pick tomatoes for a year to earn a couple hundred dollars, and then maybe you'll appreciate what you earn.

SoxxoS
04-20-2004, 01:23 PM
It's a free market...players are paid what they are worth...even if you think it's a rediculous amount. If the owner agrees upon a contract, then that means the owner thinks that the benefit of this player will equal the monetary cost the owner must pay. At the time of contract, that is what the owner thought.

After the contract is over, you can then evaluate if you got what you wanted from the player and see if you didn't get the prodution you wanted from him.

This is why I have a problem with Frank saying things about his contract. At the time, he and his agent thought that the contract was a fair deal. He signed it. Hey Frank...that's it. You honor the contract you signed. If you were to get struck by a golf ball and never been able to play again, Reinsy can't turn around and say "Frank, about that contract..." Just keep your mouth shut and play the game.

SoxxoS
04-20-2004, 01:24 PM
nlentz-

That is unbelieveable. We made the exact same points without reading each others posts. Great minds think alike, I guess. :smile:

Iwritecode
04-20-2004, 01:30 PM
Originally posted by sas1974
I agree that if people actually knew what the owners were making, it would put a new perspective on the player's salaries.


Well, according to JR, the Sox aren't making any money.

I'm sure he's going to have to get a second job pretty soon just to keep the team running...

Honestly, how much money to owners actually make from their respective baseball teams? I'm sure they get some sort of set income that's included in the payroll but can it really be in the double-digit millions?

nodiggity59
04-20-2004, 01:31 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1


Giambi's right....Cruise works three months on a movie and gets 35- 40 million?

Lip

Yep. Because without him the movie wouldn't make any money at all. Baseball teams rarely attribute their success to one player. In movies, merely having Ton Cruise added on to a decent project makes your movie make a ton of more money.

Basically, there is no single player who can bring in 3 million fans. Maybe they increase it from 2.5 to 3 or so, but in movies Tom Cruise can take a regularly grossing film (75mil or so) and exponentially increase the amount of publicity, and therefore revenue, it receives. Tom Cruise movies play all over the world in every possible theatre venue and are seen by every demographic because he is a "star."

Has Tom Cruise earned the status he has? Has he worked hard enough for it? That's another question but the bottom line is he has that status and is paid accordingly.

Baby Fisk
04-20-2004, 01:44 PM
Originally posted by Iwritecode
Well, according to JR, the Sox aren't making any money. I'm sure he's going to have to get a second job pretty soon just to keep the team running...


:reinsy
"Tell me about it. You don't wanna know how brutal the secondary job market is for despised baseball chairmen. The freakin' post office isn't even takin' applications..."

Lip Man 1
04-20-2004, 08:21 PM
Nodiggity says: "Has Tom Cruise earned the status he has? Has he worked hard enough for it? That's another question but the bottom line is he has that status and is paid accordingly ."

Agreed...and professional athletes have also earned that status. I'd argue the physicality of sports is more difficult then being an actor and you can only do it for a finite number of years as opposed to actors like Paul newman who are still very good in their 70's.

Lip

voodoochile
04-20-2004, 09:04 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Why? I think he's nailed it completely correct. Don't get me wrong, players are very well paid for their work but when you look at it in the context of the entire entertainment industry and you see what folks like Tom Cruise, the Rolling Stones, Julia Roberts make and so on, athletes salaries aren't that unreasonable.

I always mention this to folks who start complaining about what Barry Bonds etc makes.

I'm all for reducing athletes salaries as long as you reduce salaries in the other entertainment venues as well.

Giambi's right....Cruise works three months on a movie and gets 35- 40 million?

Lip

And each of his films normally grosses over $200M with some in the $500M range. By the time video sales, PPV, rental and overseas get done with it, it generates almost $1B in revenue on costs of normally around $100M. Sounds like Cruise is worth every penny...

ode to veeck
04-20-2004, 11:57 PM
Well, according to JR, the Sox aren't making any money.

you poked me in the eye pinocchio ... er JR

StillMissOzzie
04-21-2004, 12:21 AM
Random thoughts:

In spite of Giambi's rant, we'll never know how much the owners make, unless some antitrust/ congressional action pries their books open.

I really don't care how much the owners make anyhow. I'd rather Steinbrenner made an extra $50 million if some sort of payroll cap, along with real revenue sharing, leveled the playing field.

Likewise, I couldn't care less how much Cruise, Costner, et al. make on their movies. When you are one of the best in the world at what you do, the free market should compensate you accordingly.

Besides, there wouldn't be too many people, other than friends and immediate family, that would pay very much to see me play baseball OR star in a movie.

My $0.02

SMO
:gulp: