PDA

View Full Version : D'Backs Debt 300 million?!!?!?


santo=dorf
11-02-2004, 03:49 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=1914399

Getting Johnson to waive his no-trade clause and leave Arizona seems more than likely. Johnson will turn 42 by the end of next season and privately couldn't stand playing with so many young players last season.


Johnson was nearly traded before the July 31 deadline, but the Diamondbacks balked at the end, believing a better deal was on the horizon. But it never materialized. In truth, it's highly unlikely that Backman and Johnson could coexist. The Diamondbacks' debt is somewhere in the $300 million range. They will be paying out deferred payments to current and former players past 2009 and their remaining stadium debt is expected to be on the books for more than a decade. Call it the price for winning it all in 2001. Erasing the $16 million Johnson is to be paid next season won't be a panacea, but it will help. And to those saying trading Konerko to AZ isn't a possibility due to Richie Sexson:

Backman's arrival also means it's highly unlikely first baseman Richie Sexson (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=5931) will re-sign with the Diamondbacks. He already was incensed that the club initially offered him just a one-year deal heavily loaded with incentives tied to his staying healthy. Before 2004, Sexson averaged nearly 152 games per season in his previous five years.
If Johnson is traded, why would Sexson even want to stay?Wally Backman just might help the Sox towards landing Randy Johnson. :bandance:

Tekijawa
11-02-2004, 04:11 PM
Doesn't this just give Jerry more ammo when he cries poor this winter?

DumpJerry
11-02-2004, 04:32 PM
Doesn't this just give Jerry more ammo when he cries poor this winter?I was thinking the same thing, Jawa. However, that situation is very different. We're not paying for a stadium, it appears they are. Also, the question of fiscal management comes into play, was this the result of poor $$ management and not just "going for broke" to win the WS? The Yankees don't seem to be in dire financial straits.

gosox41
11-03-2004, 10:30 AM
I was thinking the same thing, Jawa. However, that situation is very different. We're not paying for a stadium, it appears they are. Also, the question of fiscal management comes into play, was this the result of poor $$ management and not just "going for broke" to win the WS? The Yankees don't seem to be in dire financial straits.
The Yankees are the exception to the rule. It's like comparing MJ in his prime to anyone else in the league.


Bob

gosox41
11-03-2004, 10:33 AM
"The Diamondbacks' debt is somewhere in the $300 million range. They will be paying out deferred payments to current and former players past 2009 and their remaining stadium debt is expected to be on the books for more than a decade. Call it the price for winning it all in 2001. Erasing the $16 million Johnson is to be paid next season won't be a panacea, but it will help."


So players signed contracts with the D-Backs a few years ago and are still going to get paid through 2009? I thought JR was the only cheap bastard who did this.

The stadium had huge cost overruns which the D-Backs had to pick up. Also, the fact that the D-Backs were deferring money for so long while trying to win it all shows that they didn't have the cash on hand to pay these guys.



Bob

mantis1212
11-03-2004, 10:49 AM
Maybe they should declare bankruptcy like their new manager did...

TDog
11-03-2004, 11:35 AM
Losing Johnson and Sexson will (as it seems inevitable) bury the franchise. Fan interest in the D'backs already is dead in Arizona. But at least the few remaining fans can die happy, having won the World Series in their lifetime.

Hangar18
11-03-2004, 12:58 PM
The Yankees don't seem to be in dire financial straits.
Arizona Broke + Reinsdorf Cheap = No Randy Johnson
Arizona Broke + Steinbrenner Spending = Randy Johnson NY Yankee

Hangar18
11-03-2004, 12:59 PM
Doesn't this just give Jerry more ammo when he cries poor this winter?
:reinsy " Hey, ive got 4 Yacht Payments to make every month ....."

SOXSINCE'70
11-03-2004, 01:21 PM
:reinsy

"Y'know,it's amazing how you people spend my money.
You talk about what free agents you want signed,but
you won't come to my wonderful ballpark.I can't afford these
people if you don't sell out the joint 81 times a year.
If you show up,i'll add payroll.Honest.
And if you believe that,John Kerry is the new president.":angry:

JKryl
11-06-2004, 12:49 AM
:reinsy

"Y'know,it's amazing how you people spend my money.
You talk about what free agents you want signed,but
you won't come to my wonderful ballpark.I can't afford these
people if you don't sell out the joint 81 times a year.
If you show up,i'll add payroll.Honest.
And if you believe that,John Kerry is the new president.":angry:
John Kerry is president? I'll believe that before I believe you put out for Randy Johnson.

Lip Man 1
11-06-2004, 01:50 PM
Bob:

The Diamondbacks also have a World Series trophy. That's trumps everything.

They are mostly in debt NOT because of their baseball operation but because they are paying most if not all the costs for their own stadium. Big difference.

Refreshing that for once an organization didn't extort a community isn't it?

That stadium debt will go down over time...so in the short term the organization bought themselves time and good graces with their fans by winning a title.

Sounds like a smart plan to me...win a title, buy time with the fans and now work on paying down the stadium debt to the point where they can go back to a 90-100 million dollar payroll.

At least they have a plan unlike the constant carping and meandering coming out of the South Side 'organization.'

Lip

Paulwny
11-06-2004, 02:52 PM
Bob:

The Diamondbacks also have a World Series trophy. That's trumps everything.

They are mostly in debt NOT because of their baseball operation but because they are paying most if not all the costs for their own stadium. Big difference.

Refreshing that for once an organization didn't extort a community isn't it?

That stadium debt will go down over time...so in the short term the organization bought themselves time and good graces with their fans by winning a title.

Sounds like a smart plan to me...win a title, buy time with the fans and now work on paying down the stadium debt to the point where they can go back to a 90-100 million dollar payroll.

At least they have a plan unlike the constant carping and meandering coming out of the South Side 'organization.'

Lip
Also, for the 1st four yrs their didn't get a share of the general MLB tv revenue which is split amongst all teams. I belive that was $25 mil/yr or $100 mil less debt.

MisterB
11-06-2004, 03:45 PM
They are mostly in debt NOT because of their baseball operation but because they are paying most if not all the costs for their own stadium. Big difference.

Refreshing that for once an organization didn't extort a community isn't it?

That stadium debt will go down over time...so in the short term the organization bought themselves time and good graces with their fans by winning a title.

Sounds like a smart plan to me...win a title, buy time with the fans and now work on paying down the stadium debt to the point where they can go back to a 90-100 million dollar payroll.

At least they have a plan unlike the constant carping and meandering coming out of the South Side 'organization.'

Lip
68% of Bank One Ballpark was publicly funded. The D'Backs were in for the ther 32% (about $111M).

Flight #24
11-06-2004, 06:05 PM
Sounds like a smart plan to me...win a title, buy time with the fans and now work on paying down the stadium debt to the point where they can go back to a 90-100 million dollar payroll.

We'll see how well it works through the rebuilding and how much "time" they get from the fans. Judging by attendance this year (2d lowest in team history at 2.8mil, down 400k from last year), I'd guess it'll be another decent drop, and only go back up when/if the team wins again.

EDIT: that 2.8mil is 2003 attendance. 2004 was 2.5mil, a franchise low.

PaleHoseGeorge
11-06-2004, 06:36 PM
Doesn't this just give Jerry more ammo when he cries poor this winter?Rule #1 about Jerry Reinsdorf and money:
Jerry doesn't need more ammo (or even any ammo) to cry poor. No matter what happens, he is still poor.

Build him a free stadium? He is still poor.
Give him a sweetheart lease? He is still poor.
Collect revenue from 100 skyboxes? He is still poor.
Raise ticket prices and parking fees? He is still poor.
TV/radio deal commensurate with #3 market in MLB? He is still poor.
Fork over a stadium naming rights deal? He is still poor.

And as for the roster...

Sign Albert Belle for $11 million in November? Trade Alvarez, Hernandez, and Baines the following July.
Sign Frank Thomas to a "guaranteed" long-term deal? Invoke the diminished skills clause, and pay him a fraction of what lesser talents get.
Sign Magglio Ordonez to keep him from free agency? Let the deal without the diminished skills clause run out, then tell everyone Magglio got bad advice for not signing a new deal *after* he suffers a career-threatening injury.

There is no end to it.

gosox41
11-07-2004, 12:04 PM
Bob:

The Diamondbacks also have a World Series trophy. That's trumps everything.

They are mostly in debt NOT because of their baseball operation but because they are paying most if not all the costs for their own stadium. Big difference.

Refreshing that for once an organization didn't extort a community isn't it?

That stadium debt will go down over time...so in the short term the organization bought themselves time and good graces with their fans by winning a title.

Sounds like a smart plan to me...win a title, buy time with the fans and now work on paying down the stadium debt to the point where they can go back to a 90-100 million dollar payroll.

At least they have a plan unlike the constant carping and meandering coming out of the South Side 'organization.'

Lip
It must be easy to make big decisions when the money isn't yours. Look at it from a perspecitve other then your own. If you can make judgments like that then I can make judgements about you. There's more then one way to view things.

Also, I'd love to see the Sox win the WS. But I'd bet you that if JR broke up a WS team and the team lost 100+ games the next couple of years you'd be complianing a lot.

As for the D-Backs stadium, I believe some was publicly funded, but there were also a ton of cost overruns.

Also, Lip, let'sd see the fan support the D-Backs get next year to help them fund their stadium debt and up their payroll back to the $90-100 mill level. Want to bet it'll be more then the few years you thin it is. Why do you think the D-Backs had so many deferred contracts through 2009? And to think you cry when JR tries to defer contracts with the new CBA rules.

Basically the D-Backs are in huge debt because they didn't make sound financial decisions. The orginal owners aren't to happy with their investment as the cash call that brough in new ownership decreased their percentage owned.



Bob

gosox41
11-07-2004, 12:08 PM
68% of Bank One Ballpark was publicly funded. The D'Backs were in for the ther 32% (about $111M).
So the new Comiske cost $115 mill. to build and the Sox funded zero. The BOB cost approximately $330 mill to build and $220 mill was publicly funded.

Who is holding who hostage?

Lip,
If JR decided to build a new $350 mill. stadium in 1990 and fund $111 mill. of it while the public pays even more money, would you cry more or less.

Also Lip, if the D-Backs are in debt of $300mill. And only $111 mill. came from the stadiu,, where did the other $200 mill come from?


Bob

PaleHoseGeorge
11-07-2004, 12:32 PM
It must be easy to make big decisions when the money isn't yours. Look at it from a perspecitve other then your own. If you can make judgments like that then I can make judgements about you. There's more then one way to view things.

Also, I'd love to see the Sox win the WS. But I'd bet you that if JR broke up a WS team and the team lost 100+ games the next couple of years you'd be complianing a lot.

As for the D-Backs stadium, I believe some was publicly funded, but there were also a ton of cost overruns.

Also, Lip, let'sd see the fan support the D-Backs get next year to help them fund their stadium debt and up their payroll back to the $90-100 mill level. Want to bet it'll be more then the few years you thin it is. Why do you think the D-Backs had so many deferred contracts through 2009? And to think you cry when JR tries to defer contracts with the new CBA rules.

Basically the D-Backs are in huge debt because they didn't make sound financial decisions. The orginal owners aren't to happy with their investment as the cash call that brough in new ownership decreased their percentage owned.



Bob^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Come on, Bob. Sing it with me!

Root, root, root for Jerry's WAL-LET... if he doesn't clean up it's a shame!

'Cause it's ONE, TWO, THREE million more banked at U-S-CELL-U-LAR FIELD!

I can't wait to hear you bitching the day the Sox actually win something. "This is going to be the ruin of us!"

:gulp:

:ohno
"We both know that day is never coming, PHG."

Lip Man 1
11-07-2004, 02:09 PM
PHG:

Now THAT's funny!

Lip

gosox41
11-08-2004, 10:42 AM
[QUOTE=PaleHoseGeorge]^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Come on, Bob. Sing it with me!

Root, root, root for Jerry's WAL-LET... if he doesn't clean up it's a shame!

'Cause it's ONE, TWO, THREE million more banked at U-S-CELL-U-LAR FIELD!

I can't wait to hear you bitching the day the Sox actually win something. "This is going to be the ruin of us!"

:gulp:

:ohno


That reminds me, where was the list of threads where I 'root' for JR's wallet like you claimed from an earlier thread? Show me where I say I want JR to make money.


Bob

gosox41
11-08-2004, 10:46 AM
PHG:

Now THAT's funny!

Lip
Lip,
What's funny is how you avoided my question from earlier this thread. That's OK. By poking fun at me or laughing about it and ignoring the issues says all I need to know.


Bob

voodoochile
11-08-2004, 10:51 AM
That reminds me, where was the list of threads where I 'root' for JR's wallet like you claimed from an earlier thread? Show me where I say I want JR to make money.


Bob
I don't have that list, but I admit I find your reasoning difficult to accept. What do you root for as a Sox fan?

If you want to see this team win the championship, why do you care so much about fiscal concersvative policy?

If the Sox ended up 100M in the hole in 5 years and they had a WS trophy locked up in the case, would you be happy or sad?

If you say happy, then the choice seems obvious as to what way you want to see the Sox go.

Final point..

Do you honestly believe that if the Sox built a serious pennant contender and kept it together for 4-5 years no matter what the cost (say limit payroll to $100M/year = total debt of $100-125M at the end of 5 years barring any changes in attendance, price increases, improved merchandise sales, etc.) they wouldn't make at least some of that back due to those factors I am excluding?

Why do you care if JR breaks even?

PaleHoseGeorge
11-08-2004, 12:55 PM
[QUOTE=PaleHoseGeorgeThat reminds me, where was the list of threads where I 'root' for JR's wallet like you claimed from an earlier thread? Show me where I say I want JR to make money.


BobFunny. I don't remember anyone chiming in agreeing with you that you AREN'T rooting for Jerry's wallet. And now you're back whining again?

You don't want to win a championship, Bob. You want Jerry Reinsdorf to make money winning a championship. We're Sox Fans and we're rooting for a championship. You're a Sox Fan too, but only while Jerry makes money. It's obvious you're blind to it, but the rest of us aren't having any trouble figuring it out. So go ahead rooting for Jerry's Wallet. It's your special gift.
:wink:

In fairness, I'll make you a deal. Everytime you make another post to prove my point, I'll make sure to join you singing support for Jerry's wallet. It ought to be fun.
:cool:

You can't make a championship dynasty until AFTER you win your first championship, Bob. Stop worrying about winning championship #2 until after we win #1.

gosox41
11-08-2004, 01:22 PM
Funny. I don't remember anyone chiming in agreeing with you that you AREN'T rooting for Jerry's wallet. And now you're back whining again?

You don't want to win a championship, Bob. You want Jerry Reinsdorf to make money winning a championship. We're Sox Fans and we're rooting for a championship. You're a Sox Fan too, but only while Jerry makes money. It's obvious you're blind to it, but the rest of us aren't having any trouble figuring it out. So go ahead rooting for Jerry's Wallet. It's your special gift.
:wink:

In fairness, I'll make you a deal. Everytime you make another post to prove my point, I'll make sure to join you singing support for Jerry's wallet. It ought to be fun.
:cool:

You can't make a championship dynasty until AFTER you win your first championship, Bob. Stop worrying about winning championship #2 until after we win #1.
Huh?? That's how you prove a point. No one agreed with me so you're point must be true. Whatever. I didn't see anyone agree with you, so my point must be true. Just twist things around however you like.

And how do you know anything about me, PHG?

You can sing all you want. I didn't think you'd find any proof like I thought you would about me rooting for Jerry's wallet.

gosox41
11-08-2004, 01:41 PM
I don't have that list, but I admit I find your reasoning difficult to accept. What do you root for as a Sox fan?

If you want to see this team win the championship, why do you care so much about fiscal concersvative policy?

If the Sox ended up 100M in the hole in 5 years and they had a WS trophy locked up in the case, would you be happy or sad?

If you say happy, then the choice seems obvious as to what way you want to see the Sox go.

Final point..

Do you honestly believe that if the Sox built a serious pennant contender and kept it together for 4-5 years no matter what the cost (say limit payroll to $100M/year = total debt of $100-125M at the end of 5 years barring any changes in attendance, price increases, improved merchandise sales, etc.) they wouldn't make at least some of that back due to those factors I am excluding?

Why do you care if JR breaks even?
I root for the Sox to win. And I'll blame JR for a lot of things from KW to being an idiot to the media, but I won't blame him for not taking out a lot of debt for a couple of reasons:

1. No matter what the payroll is, people will whine about it not being high enough.

2. I'm not going to fault a business for running things how the see best. If I felt for a second that JR was not putting any profits back in the team and was pocketing it, I would give up my season tickets. But everything I heard proves otherwise, unless I choose to believe the conspiracy theories here.

3. I've always suggested JR take on some debt to increase payroll, just not at the level others have suggested. They may make some of it back if they had a $100 mill. payroll for 5 years, but you can bet if this team turned out to be like the 2004 Mets, a lot of the fans whining about not having a high enough payroll won't even be going to many games as if they were winning.

4 I'd like to see JR sell. What I dislike most about him is that he's a PR nightmare and that hurts the marketing of the team. I also don't like how he's loyal to incompetent guys like Gallas or KW who haven't gotten the job done but still have jobs (or in Rob's case he voluntarily resigned).

But I refuse to fault the team for not taking on a mound of debt. Like I said, everything I hear is that JR is reinvesting any profits back in the team. It may not be how I would do things, but I don't know if the extreme is the best option for the long term interests of the Sox.


Bob

Lip Man 1
11-08-2004, 02:25 PM
Bob:

You touch on the main point yourself....PHG listed four or five monsterous advantages that Uncle Jerry has received / extorted in his time as leader of the operation in the past 25 years.

Those advantages have been worth hundreds of millions of dollars, maybe close to a billion if you count the construction costs of a new stadium, yet you STILL feel that Uncle Jerry has no moral or legal obligation to go into debt for any lenght of time for the fans that have supported him over the years to produce a champion.

That's the issue right there.

Your opinion is that cold hearted bottom line business trumps everything. That the ONLY thing that matters is that Uncle Jerry and his investors (and your friend) don't lose money... ANY money. Maybe in the real world but not when you have received the breaks like Uncle Jerry.

Maybe you don't honestly feel that way as per your previous post, but you seem to enuciate Uncle Jerry's wallet, and the business point of view, a hell of a lot more then you enuciate your opinion that he should take on more debt and that the Sox should win something meaningful.

I think if you took a poll of readers, most would side with the opinion that rightly or wrongly the image you present is one of supporting Uncle Jerry's policies. Perception unfortunately DOES become reality.

Lip

TDog
11-08-2004, 02:34 PM
Despite winning a World Series for the city, the D'backs are probably the third most popular major league team. The Dodgers would be second. But really, Phoenix has became a Cubs town.

PaleHoseGeorge
11-08-2004, 03:36 PM
I root for the Sox to win. And I'll blame JR for a lot of things from KW to being an idiot to the media, but I won't blame him for not taking out a lot of debt for a couple of reasons:

1. No matter what the payroll is, people will whine about it not being high enough.

2. I'm not going to fault a business for running things how the see best. If I felt for a second that JR was not putting any profits back in the team and was pocketing it, I would give up my season tickets. But everything I heard proves otherwise, unless I choose to believe the conspiracy theories here.

3. I've always suggested JR take on some debt to increase payroll, just not at the level others have suggested. They may make some of it back if they had a $100 mill. payroll for 5 years, but you can bet if this team turned out to be like the 2004 Mets, a lot of the fans whining about not having a high enough payroll won't even be going to many games as if they were winning.

4 I'd like to see JR sell. What I dislike most about him is that he's a PR nightmare and that hurts the marketing of the team. I also don't like how he's loyal to incompetent guys like Gallas or KW who haven't gotten the job done but still have jobs (or in Rob's case he voluntarily resigned).

But I refuse to fault the team for not taking on a mound of debt. Like I said, everything I hear is that JR is reinvesting any profits back in the team. It may not be how I would do things, but I don't know if the extreme is the best option for the long term interests of the Sox.


Bob

Let's take your comments point by point.

Regarding #1 above. I'm not sure whom you're talking about. I've read plenty from WSI posters declaring how satisfied they would be for the Sox to win even one lousy championship in their lifetime. I've stated so without reservation on many occasions myself. If anyone has articulated a position about bitching after a Sox championship it's you. You think it's the ruination of the franchise, not unlike why you jumped all over this thread about the Diamondbacks' debt. Talk about proving the point!

Regarding #2, #3, and #4 above. If you've been articulating any of this, it has been far too infrequent for me to ever remember reading it. Of course if you sincerely believe any of what you wrote here, you won't have a problem being made to look foolish. Why am I sure you'll wind up looking like a dope just the same? The answer is in the very next paragraph.

Regarding your closing comment "refusing to fault the team for not taking on a mound of debt." That's the gosox41 *I* know! Points #1-#4 take a backseat to your belief Reinsdorf is absolved of blame for not taking on debt.

Bob it's going to be a long cold winter for all Sox Fans. However here's betting it will be an especially long and cold one for you everytime you root for Jerry's Wallet like you just did again right here.

...For it's ONE, TWO, THREE million more banked at U-S-CELL-U-LAR FIELD!

:gulp:

gosox41
11-09-2004, 09:20 AM
Bob:

You touch on the main point yourself....PHG listed four or five monsterous advantages that Uncle Jerry has received / extorted in his time as leader of the operation in the past 25 years.

Those advantages have been worth hundreds of millions of dollars, maybe close to a billion if you count the construction costs of a new stadium, yet you STILL feel that Uncle Jerry has no moral or legal obligation to go into debt for any lenght of time for the fans that have supported him over the years to produce a champion.

That's the issue right there.

Your opinion is that cold hearted bottom line business trumps everything. That the ONLY thing that matters is that Uncle Jerry and his investors (and your friend) don't lose money... ANY money. Maybe in the real world but not when you have received the breaks like Uncle Jerry.

Maybe you don't honestly feel that way as per your previous post, but you seem to enuciate Uncle Jerry's wallet, and the business point of view, a hell of a lot more then you enuciate your opinion that he should take on more debt and that the Sox should win something meaningful.

I think if you took a poll of readers, most would side with the opinion that rightly or wrongly the image you present is one of supporting Uncle Jerry's policies. Perception unfortunately DOES become reality.

LipLip,

First, I doubt JR has received close to $1 billion in deals since the stadium only cost $115 mill. And that brings up the point of a lot of people making a lot of assumptions but without ever having all the facts. Take for example the D-Backs stadium that turned out to be 68% publicly funded but at a higher cost then Comiskey.

Second, there is no legal obligation for JR to anyone. Can you sue him for anything?

Third, bottom line is show me where I 'root' for JR's to make money. How does that benefit me? 'To root for' means to cheer on. I'm not cheering it on. I've mentioned before that I want to the Sox to take on some debt, though not just as large as what you want. I can see the other side of view. Is that wrong? Is it wrong to consider all the issues more then one's own? I didn't mean to think so much.

As for perception becoming reality, I can see that now. I've been accused of something that I've never actually said or done. With no proof. It's kind of funny if you look at the big picture of who says what.


Bob

gosox41
11-09-2004, 09:33 AM
[/color]

Let's take your comments point by point.

Regarding #1 above. I'm not sure whom you're talking about. I've read plenty from WSI posters declaring how satisfied they would be for the Sox to win even one lousy championship in their lifetime. I've stated so without reservation on many occasions myself. If anyone has articulated a position about bitching after a Sox championship it's you. You think it's the ruination of the franchise, not unlike why you jumped all over this thread about the Diamondbacks' debt. Talk about proving the point!

Regarding #2, #3, and #4 above. If you've been articulating any of this, it has been far too infrequent for me to ever remember reading it. Of course if you sincerely believe any of what you wrote here, you won't have a problem being made to look foolish. Why am I sure you'll wind up looking like a dope just the same? The answer is in the very next paragraph.

Regarding your closing comment "refusing to fault the team for not taking on a mound of debt." That's the gosox41 *I* know! Points #1-#4 take a backseat to your belief Reinsdorf is absolved of blame for not taking on debt.

Bob it's going to be a long cold winter for all Sox Fans. However here's betting it will be an especially long and cold one for you everytime you root for Jerry's Wallet like you just did again right here.

...For it's ONE, TWO, THREE million more banked at U-S-CELL-U-LAR FIELD!

:gulp:
This is getting old. Me saying something. You twisting my words around or just plain putting words in my mouth.


Bob

Lip Man 1
11-09-2004, 10:47 AM
Bob:

I think you are trying to split hairs. I said hundreds of millions of dollars that could be worth close to a billion when you count the stadium. Which I think was more then 115 million but I could be wrong.

The point is Uncle Jerry and his minions have had a number of breaks handed to them. Breaks worth substancial amounts of money. Where are the results?

Again you show that you are a supporter of his...you state he has no obligations at all. The old bottom line business mentality again in a 'business' that is more a public trust and less a corner hardware store.

The only people you have stated have obligations to him are the fans...you have commented and insinuated that they are obliged to show up or they aren't good Sox fans.

And you've done this more then once, making snide comments about fans who are refusing to go to the park and watch a game live until Uncle Jerry has left the scene.

What was that about 'incorrect' perceptions again?

Lip