iortiz

If they invest as UN? suggests and for whatever reason do not win (look at us) and do not gain fan base through the years, it is a possibility ... again, it is speculation. As I said, We can speculate all you want, but it won't take us anywhere. IMO

... And Miami have been considered a small market team. Again, it opens a lot speculation in order to build the case. Compa, I do not know how american baseball fans are, but soccer fans around the world, you do not change your team just like that, even if this team has a L-record. Elk you and I have been saying the same, this thing is going to be their main challenge. IMO this is going to take a lot of time. If they invest in big (they haven't until 2011) and if they do not make a solid fan base, do not be surprised that they move/sale the franchise to other city. I have to be honest. When I said the small-market thing, I rapidly imagined their fanbase=customers=market share=media market share (attendance/TV ratings) and I quickly put that "adjective". I did not make all this analysis . On the other hand when I see all the signs/facts/hard data like its Forbes' rank, Payroll, TV ratings, Attendance, DC's market complexity (Elk's explanation/view), Global/US exposure, etc. Call me crazy but I just do not see them even as a mid-class team as some suggest, far less as a big market team. But let's continue with the analysis... if they allow me and let's see if we can reach another conclusion.

I got you point perfectly. The thing is that those "100 M" (inexistent) are the double of its 2011 payroll for whatever reason. They will always face those market challenges. Their past suggest me that they will likely lose those bid wars vs Big Market teams. Besides, What about other 29 teams' intentions over the last five years? how would you re-rank this department considering those intentions in order to be consistent through this exercise? I just do not see your point viable/practical. I'm not sure if I'm clear here. What other people think?

Do you really want to explore that avenue? UN?, those "actions" are not realities. As I said, in order to be consistant and put a good foundation to this excersise those considerations/intentions will not easy to rate/measure through each team. How would you re-rate/rank that department? we should consider other teams' "intentions" over the last five years that would have changed their future. We would go in circles over and over again. That would be an endless path. I want to avoid that. That exercise will take us a lot of time and a lot speculation. As I said, that path is not practical IMO. What does the rest of the people think?

Got it and corrected.

As you know, I'm planning to go in July to Boston. I think that I'm going to buy the destination pack. It is 1300 plus flight tickets around 1500 plus expenses 2000 (I think)... The whole thing is going to cost me around 5,000. I have a question, does this revenue (destination pack) go to Red Sox's books? or it is shared with the other teams.

I haven't made the tiers. That is going to be the next step. I'm going to suggest a criteria, then you can tell me if you agree. First off, we need solid data. The only data available and facts are those which I already presented. Over the last five years, other teams have made a lot of things that could have impacted their future in several ways and should be considered as well. Nobody could remember these factors with precession. This "intentions/projections" do not have a true value/rank, since those are not even realities. As I said...Let's not speculate, Let's not put noise to the case. Let's not put "ifs". Let's not put "woulds". Let's put hard data. IMO it is the good way to do it. I could speculate in other several things, and we will end in circles again. Are you guys agree? can we continue?

I said that I didn't want to continue with this thread since we were going in circles and it was not fun anymore. Nevertheless I'm still curious in this baseball topic. I was about to open a thread but we already have this one here. I do not want to fight, Trust me. That is not my intention with this excersice at all. I just want to clarify some concepts and make my own conclusion. If you want to help me, I will appreciate it. I will understand if you do not want to participate anymore. My first question is, what is the accurate definition of big/small market team?, and the must important thing, How do we measure its size? I already put one definition and several were not agree. ORS said that the size of a market team = revenue. I agreed with this since it was somehow correlated with that definition, but again, I want to start with a good base. Do not throw numbers yet. Just the definition. My attempt is that together we can reach a good conclusion here. Step by step. Can we take revenue as a measure unit? Or do you suggest another measure unit?

He said that some of them are his personal friends/family. Thanks for the opportunity SFOC.

I know Spud, I was agreeing with you when I said "Asi es= de acuerdo=Agree", I was joking with you, no big deal at all my friend.

I really hope so...

This.

Thank you SCF. BTW If you open a fantasy MLB league, I'll be excited in participate.

I'm not copying and pasting anything. Tell me from where I'm copying and pasting?. If you can not prove it, I'll call you lair. That would be another fact. Instead of making accusations bring substance to the debate. You have not. Besides, Do you realize that Mexico is a USA's top 1-3 business partner (number 3, If I remember well)? Tons of large private american companies operate in Mexico and are adopting those rules and their policies of revenue recognition are following those standards. That is a fact. Again, I'm not copying anything, that is common knowladge in our business environment. Do I sound smart? That is your call, no mine. You refuse to see the facts. You run from the true. You insist in turning your lie in a true. That is called fallacy. The key element in order to rate the size of a company is from their ability to generate revenue. It doesn't matter where it operates (plays). Period. Read your economics books. it goes beyond the business. It goes beyond the industry. Is DC an interesting potential market place? Sounds like it is. THEY NEED TO GAIN THAT MARKET, THEY HAVEN'T. How do I know that? Nobody follows them. How does their revenue comes from? From air? It comes from their customers. Who are their customers? Their fans/followers. In a stand alone scenario, today, The Washington Nationals is closer to small market teams. That is a fact. I already showed you several numbers and perspectives. Don't believe me? Forbes has made the job for you, look at it. On the other hand, ORS has been saying that Forbes doesn't consider their revenue generated from its broadcast share. If I want to buy the Nats and only the Nats, this broadcast share doesn't matter to me at all. If I want to buy you only the team, my major concern will be Nats' ability to generate revenue by itself. They have a huge issue in that regard since nobody follows them. Will their fans (customers=revenue) follow them, if they invest? I have no idea. Besides 1. This 13% broadcast share value is unknown. 2. He said that They just renegotiated their contract this offseason, Will it impact 2012 Nats? I do not know. if yes, For How much? Again, I do not know. 3. How much of this 13% value/revenue is directly related with the team? I do not know. How is this revenue accounted and how this revenue recognition will be applied? I do not know. 4.- All these speculation put them in a better position (size)? For 6th time, I do not know. Sail in that see is clearly uncertain, it opens tons of speculation in both ways, reason why my whole analysis has been in a stand alone scenario using hard data; facts.

I think you meant, Ay caramba! AsI es, Ay Caramba!

The ability to generate revenue in a company (beyond the industry) is the key element to evaluate the size of a company. You consider other aspects as well, though. Agree.

Creo que mas allA de que estEn de acuerdo conmigo o no, al menos creo que me estoy dando a entender un poco, que para mi ya es un gran avance ya que es uno de los grandes objetivos que tengo al estar participando en Este foro. Gracias a todos por su comprensiOn y apoyo. A veces no entiendo algunos modismos que usa su lengua. Me encantarIa debatir algunos conceptos con mucho mas profundidad pero no me puedo expresar como yo quisiera en Ingles. Creo que el debate se puso bueno en el hilo de los Nacionales. Percibo que algunos se enojaron. QuizAs estoy mal entendiendo ese sentimiento. OjalA no sea el caso. Entrando en tema, que piensan de la posiciOn de Ortiz con el tema de su arbitraje? Participen seNores, no sean tImidos :harhar:

Mexico le ganO a Venezuela y a PR en la serie del caribe.