Nationals to Sign Edwin jackson

[ORS]

It's only bad when it is a disorder.

Rational means, from the dictionary.....

 

agreeable to reason; reasonable; sensible

 

What is resaonable about obsessiveness or compulsiveness? I got it right...again.

[SoxSport]

The Washington Nationals. They are a big market team' date=' just as NYY.[/quote']

 

Yikes.

[FredLynn]

Over $100 mill

 

Is that the "official" definition?

"Big" is in the eye of the beholder.

[a700hitter]

Look' date=' no offense, but you don't know what you are talking about....in any language. You think team valuations and popularity have relevance here when they don't. You spent a day talking about international revenues, [b']when you didn't know those are split equally among the 30 teams. [/b] You are out of your element in this argument because you don't know enough about baseball revenues to speak intelligently about it.

Yes and the big market teams bring in the great majority of this revenue and it gets shared evenly with everyone else. They are benefiting from the big market teams. The Nats had their beast season in 2011 and had a lot of good exciting players and they finished 14th out of 16 in attendance followed only by the Pirates and the Marlins-- two other big market teams.

[ORS]

With regard to the argument big versus small market team (no freakin middle)' date=' this argument ran it's course three hours ago. You haven't brought anything new to it. We already have been presented with this fact. If you have something new or illuminating, bring it forth.[/quote']

********, I presented new information. This is another lame attempt to marginalize what I've shared and you have failed to argue successfully against. Another one of your common tactics. We're seeing the full playbook tonight.

 

Baseball has a few hugely popular franchises and the rest of them play the "Washington Generals" to their Globetrotters. The big guys help get them all rich. It's better for baseball for the Yankees, Sox and Dodgers to be good every year with an uneven playing field than to try to achieve parity. The fans of the big market teams pack the ballparks all over the country as those big market teams travel around. They have huge footprints. They buy most of the officially licensed goods and the proceeds are split evenly 30 ways, and the smallest franchises get welfare from the biggest clubs.

Massive irrelevant popularity tanget.

[a700hitter]

Rational means, from the dictionary.....

 

agreeable to reason; reasonable; sensible

 

What is resaonable about obsessiveness or compulsiveness? I got it right...again.

If by getting it right you meant that you have proved that you are compulsive. Check to that.

[ORS]

Yes and the big market teams bring in the great majority of this revenue and it gets shared evenly with everyone else. They are benefiting from the big market teams. The Nats had their beast season in 2011 and had a lot of good exciting players and they finished 14th out of 16 in attendance followed only by the Pirates and the Marlins-- two other big market teams.

Who cares who brings it in? Iortiz used international revenues in his argument as if they were exclusive to the big market teams. They aren't. They don't add to their spending power, revenues......get it? big market teams are defined by spending power......so the fact that they are shared renders them irrelevant in the consideration of big vs small market.

[iortiz]

Look' date=' no offense, but you don't know what you are talking about....in any language. You think team valuations and popularity have relevance here when they don't.[/quote']

 

No offense, but you have no idea how economics work.

 

You said " What makes a big market team is revenues". A a 16 Forbes team is not a big market team, no in any concept, beyond the language, league or country. Company valuations are related with Revenue, EBITDA, Gross Margin among others financial KPIs YOY. Check out your economic books.

 

They are interested in fan base, mostly since they hold a broadcaster.

[ORS]

If by getting it right you meant that you have proved that you are compulsive. Check to that.

God you are incorrigibly lame. You just got your hat handed to you and you come up with this weak attempt to put it back on me. Whatever.

[a700hitter]

********' date=' I presented new information. This is another lame attempt to marginalize what I've shared and you have failed to argue successfully against. Another one of your common tactics. We're seeing the full playbook tonight.[/quote']Everything you presented had already been said or was common knowledge.

 

 

Massive irrelevant popularity tanget.

I did go off on a tangent, but it's not irrelevant. It illustrates that baseball likes the current configuration of a limited number of big market teams with a lot of small fish where the Big Market teams can continue to use their advantages. It's pretty accurate. The big teams put money in everyone's pocket with the licensing fees and revenue sharing etc. It is working perfectly well for them.

[a700hitter]

God you are incorrigibly lame. You just got your hat handed to you and you come up with this weak attempt to put it back on me. Whatever.

I didn't attempt to hand it back to you, enjoy wearing it.

[a700hitter]

Who cares who brings it in? Iortiz used international revenues in his argument as if they were exclusive to the big market teams. They aren't. They don't add to their spending power' date=' revenues......get it? big market teams are defined by spending power......so the fact that they are shared renders them irrelevant in the consideration of big vs small market.[/quote']You lose.

[iortiz]

Who cares who brings it in? Iortiz used international revenues in his argument as if they were exclusive to the big market teams. They aren't. They don't add to their spending power' date=' revenues......get it? big market teams are defined by spending power......so the fact that they are shared renders them irrelevant in the consideration of big vs small market.[/quote']

 

You refuse to read the thread. The NYY, El Real Madrid, Manchester Utd, Dallas Cowboys among a few others are big market teams. Their business interests are everywhere around the world. Their coverage is world wide. The Nats are nobody. Nobody knows them, even in their own home town nobody gives a damn about them. Saying that the Nats are big market team only because you lived there is completely insane, no offense.

[SoxSport]

Yes and the big market teams bring in the great majority of this revenue and it gets shared evenly with everyone else.

 

No. The major revenue advantage comes from local cable TV revenue, which isn't shared. That's why the Yankees have a $200+ million budget for players. They have their own local cable network in NY which generates more revenue than anybody else. More than the Red Sox' NESN. It's their new local TV contract in LA that got the Angels' Pujols. The Sox can't compete with the NY and LA markets in local TV. They also can't compete in stadium revenue vs NY. Fenway is too small.

[ORS]

No offense, but you have no idea how economics work.

 

You said " What makes a big market team is revenues". A a 16 Forbes team is not a big market team, no in any concept, beyond the language, league or country. Company valuations are related with Revenue, EBITDA, Gross Margin among others financial KPIs YOY. Check out your economic books.

 

They are interested in fan base, mostly since they hold a broadcaster.

Sure I do. You are missing a huge part of this. The Yankees and Sox are able to spend like they do because they hide revenues outside of the baseball team in their broadcast network. The Nats do the same thing. Forbes valuations don't account for these revenues. I would agree that a team, standing alone, was #X on the Forbes list should be considered in accordance with it's rank. The regional networks make the Forbes list irrelevant. It's good for determining what each team is worth, but it does not define their ability to take on risk. Other entities that are not accounted for impact that capability.

 

And, again, you didn't know this. You are right in your text book conclusions, but you don't know the industry enough to soundly apply the theory.

[a700hitter]

No. The major revenue advantage comes from local cable TV revenue' date=' which isn't shared. That's why the Yankees have a $200+ million budget for players. They have their own local cable network in NY which generates more revenue than anybody else. More than the Red Sox' NESN. It's their new local TV contract in LA that got the Angels' Pujols. The Sox can't compete with the NY and LA markets in local TV. They also can't compete in stadium revenue vs NY. Fenway is too small.[/quote']You are right that it is a drop in the bucket for the big teams, but it is a very meaningful income item for the small fish as is the revenue sharing and the additional gates brought in by the big teams. It is very material for them.

[example1]

Classic.

 

Can't you see? A 16 Forbes team is a big market team these days.

 

BTW suddenly he is interested. Mass of contradictions. Be prepare for going in circles.

 

We are all prepared to go in circles when you are at the center of a discussion.

 

You said they were a small market team. You have been shown to have been wrong. We are accused of being confused. You are shown to not understand international revenue sharing, yet you continue to hold onto your arguments. Just admit it, you were wrong initially. It won't be that embarassing because nobody actually cares about this argument. The longer it goes on the more embarassing it is. The clock is ticking. .

[iortiz]

Sure I do. You are missing a huge part of this. The Yankees and Sox are able to spend like they do because they hide revenues outside of the baseball team in their broadcast network. The Nats do the same thing. Forbes valuations don't account for these revenues. I would agree that a team, standing alone, was #X on the Forbes list should be considered in accordance with it's rank. The regional networks make the Forbes list irrelevant. It's good for determining what each team is worth, but it does not define their ability to take on risk. Other entities that are not accounted for impact that capability.

 

And, again, you didn't know this. You are right in your text book conclusions, but you don't know the industry enough to soundly apply the theory.

 

Carlos Slim's soccer and baseball teams have as much value as NYY or BOS since his regional network and telco revenues are not accounted ? Dude, do you even listen what you are talking about?

 

You should read your economics book instead playing video games, no offense.

[iortiz]

We are all prepared to go in circles when you are at the center of a discussion.

 

You said they were a small market team. You have been shown to have been wrong. We are accused of being confused. You are shown to not understand international revenue sharing, yet you continue to hold onto your arguments. Just admit it, you were wrong initially. It won't be that embarassing because nobody actually cares about this argument. The longer it goes on the more embarassing it is. The clock is ticking. .

 

He is saying that the Nats is a big market team... wait... are you changing your position?

[a700hitter]

We are all prepared to go in circles when you are at the center of a discussion.

 

You said they were a small market team. You have been shown to have been wrong. We are accused of being confused. You are shown to not understand international revenue sharing, yet you continue to hold onto your arguments. Just admit it, you were wrong initially. It won't be that embarassing because nobody actually cares about this argument. The longer it goes on the more embarassing it is. The clock is ticking. .

No, he has been proved to be right that the Nats are not a Big Market team.

[ORS]

You refuse to read the thread. The NYY' date=' El Real Madrid, Manchester Utd, Dallas Cowboys among a few others are big market teams. Their business interests are everywhere around the world. Their coverage is world wide. The Nats are nobody. Nobody knows them, even in their own home town nobody gives a damn about them. Saying that the Nats are big market team only because you lived there is completely insane, no offense.[/quote']

It has nothing to do with me living there. It's not insane. If it were insane, I'd be the only person saying it. More than half the people in this thread have disagreed with you. Just because you suckle from the a700 teat doesn't mean you need to fall into the same silly accusations of my irrationality. My point is very rational, and you have done little to argue against it successfully.

 

That said, you seem intent on focussing on the international popularity of these teams. Fine, let's follow that concept. How do you think international popularity benefits the NYY over the Washington Nationals in the ability to add expenditures to the budget?

[iortiz]

It has nothing to do with me living there. It's not insane. If it were insane, I'd be the only person saying it. More than half the people in this thread have disagreed with you. Just because you suckle from the a700 teat doesn't mean you need to fall into the same silly accusations of my irrationality. My point is very rational, and you have done little to argue against it successfully.

 

That said, you seem intent on focussing on the international popularity of these teams. Fine, let's follow that concept. How do you think international popularity benefits the NYY over the Washington Nationals in the ability to add expenditures to the budget?

 

In no way, dude.

[ORS]

Carlos Slim's soccer and baseball teams have as much value as NYY or BOS since his regional network and telco revenues are not accounted ? Dude, do you even listen what you are talking about?

 

You should read your economic book instead playing video games, no offense.

Who the f*** is Carlos Slim, and what does he have to do with this conversation?

[iortiz]

Who the f*** is Carlos Slim' date=' and what does he have to do with this conversation?[/quote']

 

Again, Stop playing video games.

 

google Carlos Slim. It is easy, actually.

[ORS]

In no way' date=' dude.[/quote']

I'd quit too if I were losing this badly.

[ORS]

Again, Stop playing video games.

 

google Carlos Slim. It is easy, actually.

You are missing the point of my question. He has no relevance to this conversation. It was rhetorical because your response was out of left field an in no way addressed my comment.

 

Anyway, I'll quit until you can resolve the gap in your argument to use the Forbes valuations....trust me you won't find it. I've read their valuations several times, they even acknowledge that they don't account for ownership of regional broadcast networks and how those offset/cover on the field loses.

 

Ball is in you court, dude. Come with a cogent response or I'll respond with something equally off topic and jaded.

[iortiz]

I'd quit too if I were losing this badly.

 

Again, Read the thread, there's my answer and the context. Of course, if you desire.

[ORS]

Again' date=' Read the thread, there's my answer and the context. Of course, if you desire.[/quote']

********, I'm asking direct questions now and all I get is nonsense about how I spend my free time. Your answer is not there, because if it was, you'd spit it out. You are spinning your wheels looking for traction.

[iortiz]

You are missing the point of my question. He has no relevance to this conversation. It was rhetorical because your response was out of left field an in no way addressed my comment.

 

Anyway, I'll quit until you can resolve the gap in your argument to use the Forbes valuations....trust me you won't find it. I've read their valuations several times, they even acknowledge that they don't account for ownership of regional broadcast networks and how those offset/cover on the field loses.

This is why I call Slim out.

 

Ball is in you court, dude. Come with a cogent response or I'll respond with something equally off topic and jaded.

 

I won't resolve anything. Forbes already did. Nats are the #16 team in the MLB Hence they are not a Big Market team.

 

BTW one question, are they a public enterprise?

[a700hitter]

The amount attributable to the Nats market is $163 million. The lowest market amount for the top ten teams is 138% of that for the Nats. The Sox figure is almost 2 1/2 times that size and the Yanks is 5 times larger. From the Nats on down those figures are fairly compressed (bunched together) as is the portion of their value attributable to their brand management. They are way closer to being a small market team than a big market. They are far from the big market franchises at this point in time.