PDA

View Full Version : Wow is Bud


Daver
12-07-2001, 08:41 PM
A complete idioit or am I reading this wrong?

http://www.msnbc.com/news/668863.asp#BODY

FarWestChicago
12-07-2001, 08:47 PM
That's what I heard on the radio yesterday. Nice burn, Bod!! :D:

Jerry_Manuel
12-07-2001, 08:56 PM
I found this funny:
Selig repeatedly cited the authority of the Blue Ribbon Panel report until one member retorted: “That Blue Ribbon Panel guy (former Sen. George Mitchell) is now trying to buy a team (the Red Sox)! He studied your sport, said you were losing money and now he wants to buy in. That leaves me a little shaky about his judgment.”

FarWestChicago
12-07-2001, 08:58 PM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel
I found this funny:
Selig repeatedly cited the authority of the Blue Ribbon Panel report until one member retorted: “That Blue Ribbon Panel guy (former Sen. George Mitchell) is now trying to buy a team (the Red Sox)! He studied your sport, said you were losing money and now he wants to buy in. That leaves me a little shaky about his judgment.” LOL!! That's always been the embarrassing question for the lying owners. If it's such a money losing venture, why are so many smart businessmen tripping over each other trying to get in line to buy a team?

Daver
12-07-2001, 09:06 PM
Originally posted by FarWestChicago
LOL!! That's always been the embarrassing question for the lying owners. If it's such a money losing venture, why are so many smart businessmen tripping over each other trying to get in line to buy a team?

What really slays me is the fact that the owners approved the sale of the Florida Marlins to Jeff Loria,owner of the Expos,BEFORE Bud went and lied to congress.If you are trying to cry poor wouldn't it be smart to keep the fact that the owner of the team that lost the most money is buying a SECOND team quiet until AFTER the hearing is over?

But then again what the hell do I know? ©

voodoochile
12-07-2001, 09:08 PM
If it's such a money losing venture, why are so many smart businessmen tripping over each other trying to get in line to buy a team?

Here's your answer...

According to Forbes, the value of all franchises was $3.2 billion in ’96, but $7.9 billion in ’01. So, this leverage gambit seems to work in general.

that $4.8 billion equity increase comes out to a little under $1 billion/year. Which is double the amount of money they are claiming to be losing...

The players see none of the income from equity. Even though a team like the D-Backs greatly increased its value this year by signing RJ, CS and winning the series, none of those players would see a dime if the club was sold tomorrow...

FarWestChicago
12-07-2001, 09:09 PM
Originally posted by daver


What really slays me is the fact that the owners approved the sale of the Florida Marlins to Jeff Loria,owner of the Expos,BEFORE Bud went and lied to congress.If you are trying to cry poor wouldn't it be smart to keep the fact that the owner of the team that lost the most money is buying a SECOND team quiet until AFTER the hearing is over?

But then again what the hell do I know? © It is beyond a comedy of errors.

CLR01
12-08-2001, 11:59 AM
Originally posted by voodoochile
The players see none of the income from equity. Even though a team like the D-Backs greatly increased its value this year by signing RJ, CS and winning the series, none of those players would see a dime if the club was sold tomorrow...



And they shouln't. Baseball is a buisness and the players are the employees. Why does noone complain that McDonalds, Home Depot, Albertson's, Wal-Mart, Ford, AA, etc, all fortune 500 companies that turn billions of dollars in profit are not paying their employees enough? Well except the actual employees of those places.

voodoochile
12-08-2001, 01:21 PM
Originally posted by CLR01
And they shouln't. Baseball is a buisness and the players are the employees. Why does noone complain that McDonalds, Home Depot, Albertson's, Wal-Mart, Ford, AA, etc, all fortune 500 companies that turn billions of dollars in profit are not paying their employees enough? Well except the actual employees of those places.

No, baseball isn't like McDonalds or Wal-Mart. If an employee from McDonalds gets fired or the store closes, the (now) ex-employee can go to a dozen other fast food restaurant chains and have a job tomorrow. Baseball doesn't work that way. There is only one MLB. Sure, they can go play in Japan or work for an independent minor league team, but it isn't close to comparable in terms of salary or lifestyle.

MLB should be a partnership between the players and the owners, much the way the NBA and NFL are. The point I was making in my first post in this thread, was the the owners are crying poor poor me and making money hand over fist in equity and cash flow. They can't have it both ways.

If the players are only employees, then none of us can complain when they ask for the moon and the stars in compensation, every other employee in the world does that. If it were a partnership and the owners and players decided to work together than all of the problems would end tomorrow. The problem in baseball is exactly what your post says... no cooperation.

bringbackrobin
12-08-2001, 02:27 PM
And some of us do complain when fortune 500 companies don't pay their employees enough.

CLR01
12-08-2001, 02:43 PM
Originally posted by bringbackrobin
And some of us do complain when fortune 500 companies don't pay their employees enough.

Well thats funny, i have never seen a post here saying McDonald's fry guys are underpaid, nor have i ever seen a share-holder or anyone else for that matter claim FWC should be making more money over at Cisco. Now im not saying it doesnt happen but in the same numbers ball players are getting it.

CLR01
12-08-2001, 03:07 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile


No, baseball isn't like McDonalds or Wal-Mart. If an employee from McDonalds gets fired or the store closes, the (now) ex-employee can go to a dozen other fast food restaurant chains and have a job tomorrow. Baseball doesn't work that way. There is only one MLB. Sure, they can go play in Japan or work for an independent minor league team, but it isn't close to comparable in terms of salary or lifestyle.


Damn, I guess they will have to learn to spend their money wisely then, no more porsche, no more daily tee times at world class golf courses. They'll have to sell two of their houses, and go get a job making <60,000 like the majority of the country. Some of them went to college, what did they learn there other than how to make a better throw to the cut off man? If they didn't learn anything else well then there are plenty of jobs availible at fast food joints in their area.


MLB should be a partnership between the players and the owners, much the way the NBA and NFL are. The point I was making in my first post in this thread, was the the owners are crying poor poor me and making money hand over fist in equity and cash flow. They can't have it both ways.

If the players are only employees, then none of us can complain when they ask for the moon and the stars in compensation, every other employee in the world does that. If it were a partnership and the owners and players decided to work together than all of the problems would end tomorrow. The problem in baseball is exactly what your post says... no cooperation.


I would like to see a partnership between the players and the owners too but it is not going to happen, both sides are too greedy, the players more than the owners. I have no problem when the players ask for the moon and the stars, i do have a problem when they whine about only getting one or the other though. Sure the owners look like ass's claiming they are losing money but why should they not be allowed to close up shop on the teams the are not maiing money? McDonbalds can close any store they want if that store is not turning a profit, and i am sure sometimes you have owners of those stores buying into other stores in better locations. Most teams are making money but some are not and they should be allowed to move or get rid of that team if they want to.

Paulwny
12-08-2001, 03:20 PM
Originally posted by CLR01

McDonbalds can close any store they want if that store is not turning a profit, and i am sure sometimes you have owners of those stores buying into other stores in better locations. Most teams are making money but some are not and they should be allowed to move or get rid of that team if they want to.

Then they should ask the gov't to rescind their exemption.
They can't have it both ways.

bringbackrobin
12-08-2001, 04:17 PM
If baseball teams are supposed to be treated like businesses, then why do they demand public money to build stadiums? Buying out a competitor to make your own business more profitable is NOT something buinesses are allowed to do. And why do they get lucrative tax loopholes and anititrust exemptions? And why are they allowed to block the entry of new competitors? Baseball is not like McDonalds or General Motors, and we shouldn't pretend that it is.

And while the players are certainly overpaid, I would much rather see the money go to them than go to the owners. Of course, most of all that money should go to building stadiums so that the public doesn't have to.

Dadawg_77
12-08-2001, 07:13 PM
Originally posted by CLR01



I would like to see a partnership between the players and the owners too but it is not going to happen, both sides are too greedy, the players more than the owners. I have no problem when the players ask for the moon and the stars, i do have a problem when they whine about only getting one or the other though. Sure the owners look like ass's claiming they are losing money but why should they not be allowed to close up shop on the teams the are not maiing money? McDonbalds can close any store they want if that store is not turning a profit, and i am sure sometimes you have owners of those stores buying into other stores in better locations. Most teams are making money but some are not and they should be allowed to move or get rid of that team if they want to.

You are missing the big picture here. Your local McDs has no effect or very little effect on a Cities or States economy. A pro sports franchise can have a big effect on local economy. People won't drive miles to go to a McD's. A McD's won't employ hundreds of employees every night, a local McD's won't bring in millions on dollars in tax revenue. Also the Twins have a legal contract to play in the dome next year, what should the remedy be if the Twins broke the lease? What would MBL be liable for? From what I am reading it doesn't sound like there is an out clause if the team goes under or is folded. Also and THIS IS THE KEY, the Twins and Expos aren't going out of buisness. They are going to be brought by other baseball teams, folded. Not one team but a group of competitors grouping together to purchace two competitors and close them down. This action could be argue as an illegal act under anti-trust laws, but the Courts have said besides labor issues, MBL is exempt from those laws unless Congress say otherwise. Thats why congressman are moving on legistation to bring MBL under the scope of anti-trust laws. If that happens contraction won't happen unless the teams fold. Which won't happen.

voodoochile
12-08-2001, 11:46 PM
Originally posted by CLR01



I would like to see a partnership between the players and the owners too but it is not going to happen, both sides are too greedy, the players more than the owners. I have no problem when the players ask for the moon and the stars, i do have a problem when they whine about only getting one or the other though. Sure the owners look like ass's claiming they are losing money but why should they not be allowed to close up shop on the teams the are not maiing money? McDonbalds can close any store they want if that store is not turning a profit, and i am sure sometimes you have owners of those stores buying into other stores in better locations. Most teams are making money but some are not and they should be allowed to move or get rid of that team if they want to.

They should? Why? Why should they get a government sponsered anti-trust exemption AND get to screw the fans and cities any time they want to and lie to congress about their finances when no one else does? Owners are just as guilty if not more so than the players, IMO. Owners get to have their cake and eat it too... Not saying the players aren't part of the problem, but if the owners would get off their asses and get serious about revenue sharing and stop trying to cry poor poor me, they might get a bit more sympathy from me. Until then, they should shut the *** up and try and fix their f'n house!

But then again, what the hell does Daver know? :)

Mathew
12-10-2001, 03:38 AM
Originally posted by voodoochile


that $4.8 billion equity increase comes out to a little under $1 billion/year. Which is double the amount of money they are claiming to be losing...

The players see none of the income from equity. Even though a team like the D-Backs greatly increased its value this year by signing RJ, CS and winning the series, none of those players would see a dime if the club was sold tomorrow...


I won't take a position either way, simply make a point and you guys can tell me how relevant it is. The reason I can think of to listen to the owners if they really were losing money.

Not all owners are speculators. I live in Canmore 15mins from Banff and heart of tourist Rocky Mountain Canada. Property values are crazy high for most and therefore property taxes are much greater for the average person. It is allways argued that because your property is worth 3% more per year, your taxes are covered by that. However, most people in town like living here and did not by to see a proffit. People at McDonalds make the same here as any place, but are taxed based on prperty values. For a land speculator this is great(parents house '88 =77,000 now 225,000) if this compares to the MLB is it possible that some of the owners like baseball don't ever plan to sell? They don't see any appreciation so they could conceivibly be compared to my example. Tell me if I'm off base because I don't know $. I own a pair of shoes, and a 650$ 1084 Volvo nothing more.

Mathew
12-10-2001, 03:41 AM
Pardon the awful spelling, it's 3am and I've had 1 too many Rainiers(cheep American beer).

voodoochile
12-10-2001, 03:48 AM
Originally posted by Mathew



I won't take a position either way, simply make a point and you guys can tell me how relevant it is. The reason I can think of to listen to the owners if they really were losing money.



The fact that the average idiot is too stupid to sell their $250 million dollar investment when it has appreciated by 100% in the last few years is not a reason to pity the idiot. NO ONE HAS THE RIGHT OR NEED TO OWN A BASEBALL FRANCHISE!!! It is much different from a $225K house. The second one is a basic necessity if you are raising kids. The first one is a major luxury and if you cannot afford to lose the $25 million a year, you should be smart enough to wise up and sell the damn thing and take your $100 million profit. Otherwise I have no pity for you. Don't cry poor mouth to me when you are sitting on a 100% profit on an initial investment of $100 million. I haven't got the time or energy to feel sympathy for you...

Daver
12-10-2001, 05:54 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile




But then again, what the hell does Daver know? :)

Exactly!!!!!!!!!