PDA

View Full Version : MLB revenue to hit $6 billion?


itsnotrequired
10-23-2007, 09:06 AM
At Selig's request, Mariner [MLB CFO] had run the numbers to project major league baseball's total gross revenue for 2007. Selig expected an increase from the record $5.4 billion in revenue the previous year, but even he was taken aback by the new figure.

"He told me revenues in the sport are going over $6 billion," said Selig. "Imagine that. When you think back to where we were 10, 15 years ago, it's stunning. What a story."

In fact, MLB revenue is growing so rapidly that the sport is on the verge of doing the unthinkable: Catching the National Football League, which is expected to gross around $6.3 billion in 2007-'08. Selig wouldn't say so for the record, but those who know him will tell you that generating more revenue than the NFL is a personal quest he believes is attainable in the very near future.

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=676862

More revenue than the NFL? Man, that was unthinkable just a few years ago.

Lip Man 1
10-23-2007, 12:51 PM
Poor owners...losing all that money!

:rolleyes:

Lip

soxfanatlanta
10-23-2007, 01:01 PM
Scott Boras is licking his chops...

WhiteSox5187
10-23-2007, 04:08 PM
I read that in the Tribune awhile ago...with revenue sharing as it is now, I think there is no excuse for "small market teams", it's just lousy ownership. Although I'm willing to bet that in KC in a couple years, they're no longer a floormat for the AL Central, they might be a team to contend with...but the Devil Rays and the Orioles...not until they get new ownership.

Hitmen77
10-23-2007, 04:30 PM
The Trib article was linked here: http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=93675

These shared revenue streams should help more middle and small market teams better compete. This may explain why the Sox have hinted that they go after free agents even though I'm guessing ticket sales will take a hit this offseason.

I wouldn't lump in the Orioles with these "downtrodden" teams - they've been big spenders for years. They've just spent their money very poorly. Like you said, they need new ownership/management.

HomeFish
10-23-2007, 04:37 PM
Unfortunately, after this offseason, half that money will be going to A-Rod.

spiffie
10-24-2007, 01:46 PM
I find it interesting that MLB is pulling anywhere from 5.4-6 billion in revenue, and the player payrolls entering this season, the money for the guys who are the reason anyone spends the money that MLB gets, totalled just a hair under 2.5 billion.

itsnotrequired
10-24-2007, 01:48 PM
I find it interesting that MLB is pulling anywhere from 5.4-6 billion in revenue, and the player payrolls entering this season, the money for the guys who are the reason anyone spends the money that MLB gets, totalled just a hair under 2.5 billion.

That's just gross revenue. When you throw in pension contributions, taxes, leases, front office, the whole minor league system, the draft, the umps, etc., the net revenue is far less than $3.5 billion.

tebman
10-24-2007, 02:54 PM
That's just gross revenue. When you throw in pension contributions, taxes, leases, front office, the whole minor league system, the draft, the umps, etc., the net revenue is far less than $3.5 billion.


"A billion here, a billion there, pretty soon it adds up to real money."
Senator Everett Dirksen
Illinois (1896 - 1969)

spiffie
10-24-2007, 03:00 PM
That's just gross revenue. When you throw in pension contributions, taxes, leases, front office, the whole minor league system, the draft, the umps, etc., the net revenue is far less than $3.5 billion.
Obviously it's gross, not net. But I'd be curious about things like leases. Seems like many of the teams nowadays have stadiums that are pure profit engines from the state rather than places with onerous leases.

Just one of those things where its always the players and their evil agents who are blamed for everything by fans and the media, and the idea out there that if only Scott Boras weren't around we could go back to $8 box seats and $0.50 beers at the ballpark.

Lip Man 1
10-24-2007, 04:46 PM
Spiffie:

Well the Sox lease when they first moved into the new stadium was called the sweetheart deal of the ages by a number of folks including John Helyar the author of "The Lords Of The Realm."

I don't know how the newer Sox lease shapes up. perhaps someone else has the info.

Lip

doublem23
10-24-2007, 09:22 PM
I read that in the Tribune awhile ago...with revenue sharing as it is now, I think there is no excuse for "small market teams", it's just lousy ownership. Although I'm willing to bet that in KC in a couple years, they're no longer a floormat for the AL Central, they might be a team to contend with...but the Devil Rays and the Orioles...not until they get new ownership.

I don't know if that's necessarily the case with the teams in the East that have to deal with the two financial juggernauts, the Yankees and Red Sox. The Central has a lot more competitive balance because no team appears to have to the ability to just outspend everyone, so a perennial doormat (like the Twins of the mid to late 90s) can become very good with good personnel moves, but in the A.L. East, it seems unlikely that Baltimore, Tampa Bay, and Toronto are ever going to be able to spend money with the Yankees and Saux and will always be disadvantaged.

Oblong
10-24-2007, 10:39 PM
Just one of those things where its always the players and their evil agents who are blamed for everything by fans and the media, and the idea out there that if only Scott Boras weren't around we could go back to $8 box seats and $0.50 beers at the ballpark.

If the players all made $50,000 a year the ticket prices would be would they are today. Ticket prices aren't set to cover costs, they are set at what fans are willing to pay. If players made $50,000 a year then it means the owners would make anywhere from $50 to 200 million more in profit.