Jump to content

MLB's Financial Problems


HuskyCaucasian

Recommended Posts

Forbes has two new reports that show a problem in MLB's finances that could be a foreshadow of things to come. I wont post the whole articles, but here are the links, read for yourself.

 

Special Report: Inside Baseball’s Debt Disaster

 

Yankees Soar, Mets Plunge On List of Baseball’s Most Valuable Teams

 

This all comes after last year's leaked financial documents and the bankruptcy of the Texas Rangers. And remember the Rickets have a huge amount of debt after they bought the cubs.

 

Here's the scariest paragraph:

the Arizona Diamondbacks and the San Diego Padres have already drastically reduced player payroll in order to help pay down what they owe creditors, a trend that could very well gain momentum and compromise league competitiveness. The Mets are unlikely to replace much of the $60 million in salaries that comes off its books after 2011, people familiar with the team’s plans say. The Dodgers’ payroll slipped to twelfth in the league last year, behind the small-market Minnesota Twins. (The Dodgers are expected to increase payroll $15 million this year.) The Chicago Cubs are operating with $583 million of debt while the Detroit Tigers have $210 million—debt-to-value ratios in excess of 50%.
Edited by Athomeboy_2000
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's scary to see this taking a toll on so many teams. It makes you think that this economy, which we've been hoping would get better for years, is nowhere near a turnaround. This really is a bad time. I can hardly imagine what it was like during the Depression.

Edited by Milkman delivers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Mar 23, 2011 -> 02:45 PM)
Forbes has two new reports that show a problem in MLB's finances that could be a foreshadow of things to come. I wont post the whole articles, but here are the links, read for yourself.

 

Special Report: Inside Baseball’s Debt Disaster

 

Yankees Soar, Mets Plunge On List of Baseball’s Most Valuable Teams

 

This all comes after last year's leaked financial documents and the bankruptcy of the Texas Rangers. And remember the Rickets have a huge amount of debt after they bought the cubs.

 

Here's the scariest paragraph:

 

The Tigers are valued at less than $420M....wow.

 

cubs will be in trouble if the cash flow drops. $532M...that has to be close to $30M a year in debt servicing at a minimum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Mar 24, 2011 -> 11:32 AM)
The Tigers are valued at less than $420M....wow.

 

cubs will be in trouble if the cash flow drops. $532M...that has to be close to $30M a year in debt servicing at a minimum.

 

That is an amazing number for a team that has the oldest stadium in baseball. If they ever need to do capital improvements, they are screwed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 24, 2011 -> 11:46 AM)
That is an amazing number for a team that has the oldest stadium in baseball. If they ever need to do capital improvements, they are screwed.

it's why they tried to get the state to pour money in last year and it turned into a complete debacle.

 

 

I'm not saying the recent economy hasn't had an impact on this, trust me, economy has hurt me, I know the effects. However, there are also a lot of bad business decisions being made by many owners. It's why I find it laughable that some "experts" were calling out the Cards for not just forking over a 10 year 300m deal to Pujols. Also, I'm sure the Mets ownership involvement with Madoff and the Dodgers divorce adds to those teams woes.

 

It's why I never went insane when KW or JR wanted nothing to do with mega deals, unless you're Bos or NYY they're hard to absorb if they fail, or even if the player ends up being only decent. Worst deal RIGHT NOW (and I'm stressing right now because I do not want this to devolve into the thread on Peavy that's going on now) is Peavy's. If he never pitches for the Sox again and they have zero insurance to cover it are out 37m over the next 2 years with the 4m buyout, which would suck. However, it would be done in 2 years, not linger around for years.

 

We'll just pile on the Cubs here because I know the terms off the top of my heard, the Cubs will pay Soriano 18m dollars more than the Sox are paying Dunn the next 4 years, contracts like that can cripple a franchise.

Edited by SoxFan562004
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sox #10 in value, #7 in OI, and one of the lowest in debt ratio at 8%.

 

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 24, 2011 -> 11:46 AM)
That is an amazing number for a team that has the oldest stadium in baseball. If they ever need to do capital improvements, they are screwed.

 

They will do what they are doing right now - asking the state and city for money. When they get turned down, its going to get very interesting for them.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe if the Mets canned Minaya long ago when he'd already proven worthless instead of letting him try to cover up terrible signing after terrible signing they wouldn't have wound up in such a mess.

 

The teams have nothing to blame but themselves. A lot of those teams you see with issues (Mets, Dodgers, Tigers) overspent on bad rosters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Mar 24, 2011 -> 05:45 PM)
Maybe if the Mets canned Minaya long ago when he'd already proven worthless instead of letting him try to cover up terrible signing after terrible signing they wouldn't have wound up in such a mess.

 

The teams have nothing to blame but themselves. A lot of those teams you see with issues (Mets, Dodgers, Tigers) overspent on bad rosters.

The Mets also have the whole Madoff thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Mar 24, 2011 -> 04:45 PM)
Maybe if the Mets canned Minaya long ago when he'd already proven worthless instead of letting him try to cover up terrible signing after terrible signing they wouldn't have wound up in such a mess.

 

The teams have nothing to blame but themselves. A lot of those teams you see with issues (Mets, Dodgers, Tigers) overspent on bad rosters.

 

The Tigers debt to equity could be that low if they financed and own the stadium.

 

The cubs situation is interesting in that Ricketts can afford the operating loss if he wanted to.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

There's some remarkable details coming out about the Metropolitans.

New York Mets owner Fred Wilpon said the team is "bleeding cash" and could lose $70 million this season, in an interview with Sports Illustrated that was obtained by the New York Daily News.

 

Wilpon also said that he fears he could lose the Mets if the trustee for victims of Bernard Madoff's Ponzi scheme wins a $1 billion lawsuit against the team and the owner's other interests.

 

Wilpon said he is willing to settle based on the $295 million in fictitious profits he earned, but will not settle based on $700 million in principal he and his partners invested with Madoff.

 

...

Wilpon has been trying to sell a stake in the team to raise much needed cash. The magazine reported that if he can raise $200 million, $25 million will pay back an emergency loan to Major League Baseball; $75 million will be used to pay down team debt of $427 million; and $100 million will go to operating expenses.

 

According to the magazine, Madoff investments were supposed to offset debt owed to players. When the Mets wanted to get rid of Bobby Bonilla after the 1999 season, they would have owed him $5.9 million. Instead, they decided to invest that money with Madoff at a return of 10 percent to 12 percent.

 

They would pay Bonilla $1.2 million per year for 25 years, payments based on an annual interest rate of 8 percent. So in theory, had Madoff's schemes not tanked, a seemingly horrible financial decision would have in fact created a net profit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Link

The Los Angeles Dodgers and New York Mets are widely known to be in financial hot water.

 

But seven other major league teams, including the Philadelphia Phillies, Chicago Cubs and Texas Rangers, are out of compliance with MLB rules regarding debt, the Los Angeles Times has reported, citing three anonymous sources familiar with a confidential briefing presented at last month's owners meetings.

....

 

 

The violations in question concern debt-service rules intended to limit a club's debt to 10 times its annual revenue, according to the Times. Other teams named in the owners' briefing were the Baltimore Orioles, Detroit Tigers, Florida Marlins and Washington Nationals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 3, 2011 -> 04:57 PM)
Wow, seeing the Phillies on there was surprising...

I was wondering how on Earth they could possibly have supported some of the contracts they've given out when they signed Lee last offseason. Now I'm wondering more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 4, 2011 -> 09:38 AM)
But they have a lot more money coming off the books too.

True, but Cubs have an expensive stadium that the state basically laughed at when asking for money to help with, and Ricketts has to cut a 30 million dollar check for his debt before dime one is spent elsewhere

 

Biggest thing though is yes, they have money coming off the books, but it's not like their system is brimming with MLB ready prospects to come in and contribute at a high level to make the Cubs competitive. So if Albert has any desire to be on a good team, Cubs will have difficulty doing that.

 

I do foresee a scenario where Albert only cares about biggest deal and Cubs give it to him and they are bad for many years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone following the Ricketts stuff recently?

 

The sound bite of the father saying that the cubs sellout win or lose when they bought the team was intriguing. He admitted he does not care about sports and is not a fan and this was a business venture not a feel good story.

 

The debt taken on is looking pretty daunting here and TD Ameritrade appears to want nothing to do with this.

 

Tom Ricketts is looking like a mix between Mike McCasky and Paris Hilton more and more.

 

The cub payroll may be below $100M next year.

 

Then you put Hendry in the mix and it makes it appear even scarier not to mention Crane Kenny running around. That is like a clown car.

Edited by Harry Chappas
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Jun 5, 2011 -> 11:02 AM)
Anyone following the Ricketts stuff recently?

 

The sound bite of the father saying that the cubs sellout win or lose when they bought the team was intriguing. He admitted he does not care about sports and is not a fan and this was a business venture not a feel good story.

The debt taken on is looking pretty daunting here and TD Ameritrade appears to want nothing to do with this.

 

Tom Ricketts is looking like a mix between Mike McCasky and Paris Hilton more and more.

 

The cub payroll may be below $100M next year.

 

Then you put Hendry in the mix and it makes it appear even scarier not to mention Crane Kenny running around. That is like a clown car.

 

Again, bye-bye Poo-Holes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Jun 5, 2011 -> 11:02 AM)
Anyone following the Ricketts stuff recently?

 

The sound bite of the father saying that the cubs sellout win or lose when they bought the team was intriguing. He admitted he does not care about sports and is not a fan and this was a business venture not a feel good story.

 

The debt taken on is looking pretty daunting here and TD Ameritrade appears to want nothing to do with this.

 

Tom Ricketts is looking like a mix between Mike McCasky and Paris Hilton more and more.

 

The cub payroll may be below $100M next year.

 

Then you put Hendry in the mix and it makes it appear even scarier not to mention Crane Kenny running around. That is like a clown car.

 

What were exactly the circumstances of this being said? Not that shocking though. I always felt that Ricketts could never afford the Cubs, especially when he was asking for public money in year one. I am a little shocked that he said it was always a business venture though considering he seemed like a Cub fan who wasn't going to just spend blindly. Now it appears, he was a phony since the beginning. MLB wouldn't have this problem with the Cubs had they just allowed Cuban to buy it. He would've turn them into a real powerhouse, on the field and financially.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Jun 6, 2011 -> 05:43 PM)
What were exactly the circumstances of this being said? Not that shocking though. I always felt that Ricketts could never afford the Cubs, especially when he was asking for public money in year one. I am a little shocked that he said it was always a business venture though considering he seemed like a Cub fan who wasn't going to just spend blindly. Now it appears, he was a phony since the beginning. MLB wouldn't have this problem with the Cubs had they just allowed Cuban to buy it. He would've turn them into a real powerhouse, on the field and financially.

 

The father is the one saying the business stuff. Tom Rickettes is a die-hard fan. His father is a businessman.

 

Tom pitched the idea to the familiy and the family is it for the business only. Tom is looking like he is left to figure it out on his own.

 

The cubs did not get the rich owner fan they wanted, they got Paris Hilton with a piggy bank.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...