Will there be a 2022 season?

[Old Red]

You keep acting like I don't understand your point. I do.

 

I just disagree.

 

Look, I get how many owners take the vast chunk of revenue, and some lose on their quest to make their business successful. I just think they take and demand too much. You don't.

 

No MLB owner loses money when they sell their team- at least as long as I have been around. Even if the lose a few million here and there, which I doubt, there is no risk at losing money, overall, IMO, and that's one thing that what sets this business apart from many others.

 

Moon I know you know my point, and we just disagree. I’m not against players making more money, and I have said there should be a payroll floor on what each team at least have to spend up to, which should give more players more money unless you load up on $30M+ contracts. I also don’t disagree that the owners try, and squeeze every last cent they can, and pay the players as little as possible, but because they are the owners they can try, and do do that.

[moonslav59]

Then the future of the game must still be in great shape...

 

Well, it looks like the owners are setting the timer on the big bomb.

[moonslav59]

Moon I know you know my point, and we just disagree. I’m not against players making more money, and I have said there should be a payroll floor on what each team at least have to spend up to, which should give more players more money unless you load up on $30M+ contracts. I also don’t disagree that the owners try, and squeeze every last cent they can, and pay the players as little as possible, but because they are the owners they can try, and do do that.

 

It seems to me, you want the owners to make obscene amounts of money, because $500K is more than most people dream of making. Am I wrong?

[mvp 78]

I thought my math was bad!

 

It is. Annual return on investment for Schott was about 12%.

 

((Gain+Investment)/Investment)^(1/years)

[mvp 78]

It is. Annual return on investment for Schott was about 12%.

 

((Gain+Investment)/Investment)^(1/years)

 

This is assuming a full 16 years in the calculation.

[moonslav59]

It is. Annual return on investment for Schott was about 12%.

 

((Gain+Investment)/Investment)^(1/years)

 

I guess I'd be a bad accountant.

 

So, if I invested $11M in something, and made 12% a year, in 16 years, I'd have $67M to show for it?

 

Or, and I confusing the term "return" with something else?

[Old Red]

It seems to me, you want the owners to make obscene amounts of money, because $500K is more than most people dream of making. Am I wrong?

 

If we weren’t having these discussions I wouldn’t even think of how much money the owners take in compared to the players just like i don’t think of how much money the big colleges make off the players while they are in school. I don’t care what profession somebody is in I wouldn’t have sympathy for them if they were making $500K, and the company was making millions, so I guess I don’t look at it like the owners making money off the players even though they are.

[moonslav59]

If we weren’t having these discussions I wouldn’t even think of how much money the owners take in compared to the players just like i don’t think of how much money the big colleges make off the players while they are in school. I don’t care what profession somebody is in I wouldn’t have sympathy for them if they were making $500K, and the company was making millions, so I guess I don’t look at it like the owners making money off the players even though they are.

 

I just think that when we are having a discussion about how much people make in a business that is in the middle of negotiating how much each should make, it might help to think about it, or just not make comments.

 

This is not meant as a criticism of you or your position, but to me, it's about looking at the context of the entertainment business and where the trends have been going, and factoring in inflation, what would be fair for both sides.

 

I realize every person probably has a different idea of what is fair, and maybe I'm wrong about my assumptions on what owners are making on what I feel like is no-risk business.

 

I'm open to the idea that I might be wrong. I'm also open to the idea that owners might be making far more than what I think they make..

[notin]

If we weren’t having these discussions I wouldn’t even think of how much money the owners take in compared to the players just like i don’t think of how much money the big colleges make off the players while they are in school. I don’t care what profession somebody is in I wouldn’t have sympathy for them if they were making $500K, and the company was making millions, so I guess I don’t look at it like the owners making money off the players even though they are.

 

I think you have left out that complaining one is underpaid (for any job) is an American tradition that rivals hot dogs and apple pie. The Founding Fathers would have given us that as an inalienable right, but they knew it was impossible to take away.

 

It’s the American Way to stand with the underpaid! Come join us and be a Patriot…

[Bellhorn04]

Well, it looks like the owners are setting the timer on the big bomb.

 

It's conceivable that baseball becomes less popular and less lucrative at some point, regardless of what the owners do.

 

It kind of baffles me that the money can keep growing the way it has, when we hear so much about young people losing interest in baseball etc.

[Old Red]

I just think that when we are having a discussion about how much people make in a business that is in the middle of negotiating how much each should make, it might help to think about it, or just not make comments.

 

This is not meant as a criticism of you or your position, but to me, it's about looking at the context of the entertainment business and where the trends have been going, and factoring in inflation, what would be fair for both sides.

 

I realize every person probably has a different idea of what is fair, and maybe I'm wrong about my assumptions on what owners are making on what I feel like is no-risk business.

 

I'm open to the idea that I might be wrong. I'm also open to the idea that owners might be making far more than what I think they make..

 

The opinions on here are no big deal one way, or the other, and that is what they are is just opinions, so what I think, or don’t think shouldn’t matter to you one way, or the other. I don’t give my opinion on here for you to agree, or disagree, and I don’t tell you how to think, or not think. Where does it say I wasn’t thinking about the discussion subject? I said if we wasn’t having this discussion I wouldn’t be thinking about it, so I didn’t say I wasn’t thinking about, so I wasn’t doing anything less than you, and just making comments. You tell me telling me to think about a topic, and just not make comments about something isn’t criticism just like you said one time that you disagreeing with Cora didn’t mean he was wrong, and yes it was, and yes it is now. You really think that discussions on here are so life important that you have to study like taking an important test. I got a News Flash. It isn’t.

[Bellhorn04]

I guess I'd be a bad accountant.

 

So, if I invested $11M in something, and made 12% a year, in 16 years, I'd have $67M to show for it?

 

Or, and I confusing the term "return" with something else?

 

Yes, 11M at 12% for 16 years = 67M. Compounding is an amazing thing. Here's the table:

 

1 11.00 12.32

2 12.32 13.80

3 13.80 15.45

4 15.45 17.31

5 17.31 19.39

6 19.39 21.71

7 21.71 24.32

8 24.32 27.24

9 27.24 30.50

10 30.50 34.16

11 34.16 38.26

12 38.26 42.86

13 42.86 48.00

14 48.00 53.76

15 53.76 60.21

16 60.21 67.43

[moonslav59]

The opinions on here are no big deal one way, or the other, and that is what they are is just opinions, so what I think, or don’t think shouldn’t matter to you one way, or the other. I don’t give my opinion on here for you to agree, or disagree, and I don’t tell you how to think, or not think. Where does it say I wasn’t thinking about the discussion subject? I said if we wasn’t having this discussion I wouldn’t be thinking about it, so I didn’t say I wasn’t thinking about, so I wasn’t doing anything less than you, and just making comments. You tell me telling me to think about a topic, and just not make comments about something isn’t criticism just like you said one time that you disagreeing with Cora didn’t mean he was wrong, and yes it was, and yes it is now. You really think that discussions on here are so life important that you have to study like taking an important test. I got a News Flash. It isn’t.

 

You said you didn't think about it.

 

A debate is about exchanging opinions, so I'm not sure where you were going with that piece.

 

BTW, where did I say these discussions are so life important?

 

I'm bored, so I discuss. It's not even close to "life important."

 

It's weird how you imply I am putting words in your mouth, the you actually put words in my mouth. (Maybe you meant to put a question mark after your third to last sentence.)

[moonslav59]

Yes, 11M at 12% for 16 years = 67M. Compounding is an amazing thing. Here's the table:

 

1 11.00 12.32

2 12.32 13.80

3 13.80 15.45

4 15.45 17.31

5 17.31 19.39

6 19.39 21.71

7 21.71 24.32

8 24.32 27.24

9 27.24 30.50

10 30.50 34.16

11 34.16 38.26

12 38.26 42.86

13 42.86 48.00

14 48.00 53.76

15 53.76 60.21

16 60.21 67.43

 

Thanks. I knew it was surprising, but I didn't realize it was by that much.

 

So, assuming most owners make out like she did, they make 12% above and beyond what they make year-to-year in profits.

 

Now, some teams claim they lose money year-to-year, but one has to wonder why the value of a team rises by 12%, when losing money year after year.

 

Then, there is the side money owners can and often make on the side businesses like cable TV, concession and merchandising. Some make revenue sharing money, too.

[Old Red]

You said you didn't think about it.

 

A debate is about exchanging opinions, so I'm not sure where you were going with that piece.

 

BTW, where did I say these discussions are so life important?

 

I'm bored, so I discuss. It's not even close to "life important."

 

It's weird how you imply I am putting words in your mouth, the you actually put words in my mouth. (Maybe you meant to put a question mark after your third to last sentence.)

 

I said if we weren’t having this discussion I wouldn’t even think about it. Once again if we weren’t having this discussion I wouldn’t even think about it, but we were having this discussion, so I was thinking about it.

 

I didn’t say you said any discussion on here was life important. Those were my words,my opinion, and I answered my own question.

 

What’s weird is you telling me to think about the subject we are discussing, and not just make comments, and saying that’s not criticism.

[Bellhorn04]

Thanks. I knew it was surprising, but I didn't realize it was by that much.

 

So, assuming most owners make out like she did, they make 12% above and beyond what they make year-to-year in profits.

 

Now, some teams claim they lose money year-to-year, but one has to wonder why the value of a team rises by 12%, when losing money year after year.

 

Then, there is the side money owners can and often make on the side businesses like cable TV, concession and merchandising. Some make revenue sharing money, too.

 

Yes. The thing is, though, almost all of the money is dependent on the popularity of the game.

 

It's a constant theme in here that young people are not that into baseball etc. Games are too long and too boring etc.

 

I know that legal gambling is a big source of revenue now.

 

But my sense of logic says that at some point the bubble has to burst a little. The money comes from us.

[dgalehouse]

If you have that kind of money , you can make a big profit by investing it. Buying a baseball team might not be the best option . Especially a team that has trouble drawing flies on strawberry festival night. On the other hand , Joe Lunchbox can " invest " his money in a bank savings account and get next to nothing in interest. Money talks.

[jad]

I guess I'd be a bad accountant.

 

So, if I invested $11M in something, and made 12% a year, in 16 years, I'd have $67M to show for it?

 

Or, and I confusing the term "return" with something else?

 

Yes. A businessman once explained it to me as "the rule of 72." Divide 72 by the return in 'percentages'. That gives you the number of years it takes to double the investment. So 72/12 = 6. Meaning in 6 years you double your investment and have 22M. In another 6 you have 44. So another 4 (I'm estimating now) 67 sounds about right.

Edited March 7, 2022 by jad

[Tedballgame]

They are making a mistake by not getting a federal mediator. Both sides should be locked in a room with the mediator until a deal is reached. This is getting ridiculous. They are playing a game of chicken and the fans are the losers.

[dgalehouse]

Maybe we need a fan revolt. Tell them all to go to hell. Just stay away from the ballpark when they finally do settle on an agreement.

[Bellhorn04]

They are making a mistake by not getting a federal mediator. Both sides should be locked in a room with the mediator until a deal is reached. This is getting ridiculous. They are playing a game of chicken and the fans are the losers.

 

Agreed.

[Bellhorn04]

Maybe we need a fan revolt. Tell them all to go to hell. Just stay away from the ballpark when they finally do settle on an agreement.

 

Fans can never win though, because if they do that they're depriving themselves of a pleasure they once had.

[moonslav59]

Forbes Team value vs purchase price and date of purchase:

 

$$$

5.3B NYY 8.7M '73

3.6B LAD 2B '12

3.5B BOS 660M '02

3.4B Cubs 845M '09

3.2B SFG 100M '92

2.5B NYM 2.5B '20

2.2B STL 150M '95

2.1B PHI 30M '81

2.0B LAA 184M '03

1.9B WSH 450M '00

1.9B ATL 450M '07

1.9B HOU 615M '11

1.8B TEX 593M '10

1.7B CWS 20M '81

1.7B TOR 140M '00

1.6B SEA 106M '12

1.5B SDP 800M '12

1.4B BAL 173M '93

1.3B MIN 44M '84

1.3B AZ 130M '95

1.3B COL 95M '92

1.3B PIT 92M '96

1.3B DET 82M '92

1.2B MIL 223M '05

1.2B CLE 323M '99

1.1B OAK 180M '05

1.1B CIN 270M '06

1.1B KCR 1B '20

1.1B TBR 130M '05

990M MIA 1.3B '18

 

 

[Bellhorn04]

Forbes Team value vs purchase price and date of purchase:

 

$$$

3.6B LAD 2B '12

1.5B SDP 800M '12

 

So that's an annual 6% ROR for LAD and 6.5% for SDP.

 

Not really a monster growth rate for those franchises over 10 years.

[notin]

Forbes Team value vs purchase price and date of purchase:

 

$$$

5.3B NYY 8.7M '73

3.6B LAD 2B '12

3.5B BOS 660M '02

3.4B Cubs 845M '09

3.2B SFG 100M '92

2.5B NYM 2.5B '20

2.2B STL 150M '95

2.1B PHI 30M '81

2.0B LAA 184M '03

1.9B WSH 450M '00

1.9B ATL 450M '07

1.9B HOU 615M '11

1.8B TEX 593M '10

1.7B CWS 20M '81

1.7B TOR 140M '00

1.6B SEA 106M '12

1.5B SDP 800M '12

1.4B BAL 173M '93

1.3B MIN 44M '84

1.3B AZ 130M '95

1.3B COL 95M '92

1.3B PIT 92M '96

1.3B DET 82M '92

1.2B MIL 223M '05

1.2B CLE 323M '99

1.1B OAK 180M '05

1.1B CIN 270M '06

1.1B KCR 1B '20

1.1B TBR 130M '05

990M MIA 1.3B '18

 

 

 

Exactly. Now think of all of those taxes those poor owners have to cheat their way out of paying!?! Do you know how tough on them that is?

[Bellhorn04]

Exactly. Now think of all of those taxes those poor owners have to cheat their way out of paying!?! Do you know how tough on them that is?

 

Now they're all tax cheats too?

 

Hey, let's just dismantle pro sports completely. Then there will be no more rich sports team owners. Problem solved.

 

Get rid of big time college sports while we're at it. That's all driven by money and corruption too.

Edited March 8, 2022 by Bellhorn04

[notin]

If you have that kind of money , you can make a big profit by investing it. Buying a baseball team might not be the best option . Especially a team that has trouble drawing flies on strawberry festival night. On the other hand , Joe Lunchbox can " invest " his money in a bank savings account and get next to nothing in interest. Money talks.

 

No Angry Grandpa Rambling, please…

[notin]

Now they're all tax cheats too?

 

Hey, let's just dismantle pro sports completely. Then there will be no more rich sports team owners. Problem solved.

 

Get rid of big time college sports while we're at it. That's all driven by money and corruption too.

 

 

Is this suddenly news?

[Bellhorn04]

Is this suddenly news?

 

I don't know, what's the latest on sports team owners being tax cheats?

[notin]

I don't know, what's the latest on sports team owners being tax cheats?

 

They all are. And the ones who aren’t are planning on it…