BlackSox13 Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 QUOTE (LDF @ Jan 26, 2015 -> 01:05 PM) don't get me wrong, i am ecstatic with what they have done. Not at all man. You are certainly one of the more enthusiastic members on the board LDF! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted January 26, 2015 Author Share Posted January 26, 2015 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 26, 2015 -> 07:36 PM) I agree with the assessment of the Sox being on the highest end of possible payroll, based on what I have read about their numbers through Forbes. this is Forbes 2015 mlb white sox. not all is being rpt as i mention the other income thru their other secondary companies. like chi sports serv, shared with the blawkhawks bismark corp. the sox can spend the money. they used to have salary in the 120-130 before. i am not saying have a payroll of the yanks bos or dodgers. but don't cry poor and go the cheap route when that is how they have done in the past. http://www.forbes.com/teams/chicago-white-sox/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted January 26, 2015 Author Share Posted January 26, 2015 QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Jan 26, 2015 -> 08:07 PM) Not at all man. You are certainly one of the more enthusiastic members on the board LDF! i eat chi pizza and drink chi except sCrubs kool-aid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaylorStSox Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Dec 24, 2014 -> 06:52 AM) LaRoche is not going to have a platoon partner. You don't pay a guy $25M to be a platoon player. Yes, I know he's awful vs LHP but you just deal with that because of the tradeoff of how good he is vs RHP. Now, if you're smart, you have him batting farther down in the order vs LHP, but if anybody on the roster is a target for a platoon situation it's Gillaspie, not LaRoche. You sure about that? We just gave a guy $46M to pitch 65 innings a year. I don't think the Sox will fail to do what's best for the team because of contracts; especially a contract for a stopgap journeyman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Dec 24, 2014 -> 12:52 PM) LaRoche is not going to have a platoon partner. You don't pay a guy $25M to be a platoon player. Yes, I know he's awful vs LHP but you just deal with that because of the tradeoff of how good he is vs RHP. Now, if you're smart, you have him batting farther down in the order vs LHP, but if anybody on the roster is a target for a platoon situation it's Gillaspie, not LaRoche. In a radio interview on Friday night, I believe Hahn said something about how Bonifacio could possibly have a role as a DH vs LHP. He was mentioning this more as something that him and Ventura would want to be on the same page on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 QUOTE (LDF @ Jan 26, 2015 -> 01:12 PM) this is Forbes 2015 mlb white sox. not all is being rpt as i mention the other income thru their other secondary companies. like chi sports serv, shared with the blawkhawks bismark corp. the sox can spend the money. they used to have salary in the 120-130 before. i am not saying have a payroll of the yanks bos or dodgers. but don't cry poor and go the cheap route when that is how they have done in the past. http://www.forbes.com/teams/chicago-white-sox/ How much bigger was the fan base at that time? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted January 26, 2015 Author Share Posted January 26, 2015 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 26, 2015 -> 08:18 PM) How much bigger was the fan base at that time? hahaha ... very good. but are you saying the worth of the sox is based on fans??? so all that extra income can't be counted or used. they made the money during games that the fans should up. it has a lot to do with the sox's accountants..... they are the real all stars here. business being business, the fans will come out in droves if they put a winner on the field. believe you me, they will do great in that area, the fan attendance. so the sox should not go for it, b/c the fans did not pay first. how bout put the winning team, a playoff and a possible world series team, let natural attrition take care of the older players, let the younger one come on up and fill the spot.... wow you are talking about a dynasty. let me give you another true story, Bill Writz had a series of mtg with chi owners in the early 80's. he was showing on how to put the product on the field the park, the ice. let the really good seats owners start to pay...... yearly and in advance. pocket it that extra money in the back... now the bank gives special rates for deposits in incremental deposits. lets say $$500,000 they will get a higher rate, $$1 mil even a higher rate and so on ... the bears started this and as of 1999 they have a waiting list, pre paid for 5 yrs plus. the bulls had a 4 yr waiting list + during the MJ yrs. blawhawks, writz had a 3yr ..... the sox couldn't get that lucky.... they had a chance after 2005 by screwed up and the acquisitions area and the coaching screw up. ozzie did more harm than anyone never imagine in the future of the sox. so now, JR wants pre paid season tickets investment so he can ahhh cough cough get the players needed to field the team. give me a freaking break. btw SS2k5.... i hope you know this is for a friendly conversation. i don't mean anything personal... ok Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 How much do ticket sales ultimately drive the payroll these days (after you back out the lease costs, vendor costs, etc)? I don't know the answer, but actual ticket sales are becoming a much smaller component of the revenue equation, right? I'd be curious on the percentage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted January 26, 2015 Author Share Posted January 26, 2015 QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jan 26, 2015 -> 09:48 PM) How much do ticket sales ultimately drive the payroll these days (after you back out the lease costs, vendor costs, etc)? I don't know the answer, but actual ticket sales are becoming a much smaller component of the revenue equation, right? I'd be curious on the percentage. you got a valid point, the ticket sale are really to be a second thought, esp with tv deals and all. the revenue of vendor and etc... is basically where the money comes from in the 2 source. writz and business shows you have to own the product, and / or get it lease to a really inexpensive way. a soda drink is only cost the companies 4 cents.... the company that owns the hot dog and other food product which the sox also forces the vendor to buy from them as well comes from the sports serv corp. how bout the corp advertising how much money from that???? now a smart account will find a way to diversify that with the lease of the park at such a great deal. JR was trying to buy the ownership of the PHX hockey team.... 75 mil. and he wanted the city to foot the lease and to lease it to JR as even a cheaper rate. JR is not stupid.... he is a great business man.... maybe not as good as writz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 QUOTE (LDF @ Jan 26, 2015 -> 12:57 PM) you got a valid point, the ticket sale are really to be a second thought, esp with tv deals and all. the revenue of vendor and etc... is basically where the money comes from in the 2 source. writz and business shows you have to own the product, and / or get it lease to a really inexpensive way. a soda drink is only cost the companies 4 cents.... the company that owns the hot dog and other food product which the sox also forces the vendor to buy from them as well comes from the sports serv corp. how bout the corp advertising how much money from that???? now a smart account will find a way to diversify that with the lease of the park at such a great deal. JR was trying to buy the ownership of the PHX hockey team.... 75 mil. and he wanted the city to foot the lease and to lease it to JR as even a cheaper rate. JR is not stupid.... he is a great business man.... maybe not as good as writz. Even in comparison, how much of net profits are driven by ticket sales vs. concessions, etc. Clearly Sox have a sweet-heart stadium lease which probably means their gate attendance ultimately drives a higher proportion of revenues vs. media / tv deals than certain teams but would be very curious to see the breakout. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted January 26, 2015 Author Share Posted January 26, 2015 QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jan 26, 2015 -> 09:15 PM) Even in comparison, how much of net profits are driven by ticket sales vs. concessions, etc. Clearly Sox have a sweet-heart stadium lease which probably means their gate attendance ultimately drives a higher proportion of revenues vs. media / tv deals than certain teams but would be very curious to see the breakout. you are really asking for numbers, we as fans can not give, b/c we do not have the books of the original numbers. anything more i say will be purely fiction. remember 1 thing the sox corp has a slew of accounts to keep their book. we have really digress from what was the org topic..... the sox not making anymore significant additions to what was a great offseason. i say they have the money and well the others may say different. i will say i am not going to believe the sox FO saying no money for any additional changes. btw i truly enjoyed this discussion. i hope i didn't offend anyone.... except the sox brass. then again as i always say.... what the hades do i know..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted January 26, 2015 Author Share Posted January 26, 2015 QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jan 26, 2015 -> 09:15 PM) Even in comparison, how much of net profits are driven by ticket sales vs. concessions, etc. Clearly Sox have a sweet-heart stadium lease which probably means their gate attendance ultimately drives a higher proportion of revenues vs. media / tv deals than certain teams but would be very curious to see the breakout. do you know which team is raking it in now..... the dodgers. what a deal they got. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whisox05 Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Sox pulling out stops to bump attendance http://t.co/hjEmvgGGib https://twitter.com/ESPNChiSox/status/559790322784292864 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jan 26, 2015 -> 02:48 PM) How much do ticket sales ultimately drive the payroll these days (after you back out the lease costs, vendor costs, etc)? I don't know the answer, but actual ticket sales are becoming a much smaller component of the revenue equation, right? I'd be curious on the percentage. Bruce Levine was hosting hit and run last weekend and he was talking about how each team gets 78 million dollars from the league TV deal, before anything else(local sponsorships, local TV deals, ticket and merchandise revenue). So if that's true, you would think that they should be ok even in down years Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted January 26, 2015 Author Share Posted January 26, 2015 QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Jan 26, 2015 -> 09:53 PM) Sox pulling out stops to bump attendance http://t.co/hjEmvgGGib https://twitter.com/ESPNChiSox/status/559790322784292864 i have a problem with this hype bs that is now going to permeate every media outlet. some of which i was wanting, but pls use intelligent data. they are assuming that all things being equal, that the fans base will do like 2005.... or hope for a goal of that. but come on, there is no absolute with this team as assemble. there are intangibles that has to be taken into account. injuries with no backup. etc.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 2006 should be the goal, not 2005. Attendance-wise, there's always a one year lag to catch up, especially with new season ticket packages after the WS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 QUOTE (LDF @ Jan 26, 2015 -> 03:33 PM) do you know which team is raking it in now..... the dodgers. what a deal they got. The Dodgers lost the most money of any team in MLB, something like $80 or $90 million last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 (edited) QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 26, 2015 -> 04:39 PM) The Dodgers lost the most money of any team in MLB, something like $80 or $90 million last year. And that's with the highest attendance (3.8 million) and nearly 47,000 per game, almost 3K per game higher than #2 (StL Cardinals). And with the biggest new local/regional media rights deal in baseball history (would have to check the Yankees and Red Sox numbers there, Boston has an extremely complicated, diverse and innovative/entrepreneurial revenue-driving strategy fwiw). http://www.latimes.com/sports/dodgers/dodg...0124-story.html Article about a Korean group wanting to invest $370 million for a partial/non-voting share in the Dodgers. Claims that number is at least $200 million too low, maybe low-balling in light of this recent season of financial losses as well as the local tv snafu? Edited January 26, 2015 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 26, 2015 -> 04:46 PM) And that's with the highest attendance (3.8 million) and nearly 47,000 per game, almost 3K per game higher than #2 (StL Cardinals). And with the biggest new local/regional media rights deal in baseball history (would have to check the Yankees and Red Sox numbers there, Boston has an extremely complicated, diverse and innovative/entrepreneurial revenue-driving strategy fwiw). http://www.latimes.com/sports/dodgers/dodg...0124-story.html Article about a Korean group wanting to invest $370 million for a partial/non-voting share in the Dodgers. Claims that number is at least $200 million too low, maybe low-balling in light of this recent season of financial losses as well as the local tv snafu? http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/20...at-2-5-billion/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCCWS Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 QUOTE (LDF @ Jan 26, 2015 -> 10:28 AM) let me see if i can really simplify my comment. ok, you mention of having a few key players going down ..... didn't i mention something like that in the first few words ???? finishing the offseason rebuild, depending on and solely on Rodn, #4-5 and prosoects in the minors. those minors may not be ready but who is to know esp if there is no pitchers to backup. so in essence not finishing up what they started. let take car this a little further, one of the top 3's does not produce as expected, and there is really no - one of that skills and experience, the sox do not have that backup, again, the FO not finishing what they started. so pls explain how i didn't fully explain this. ~~~ edit, pls also let me further point out, do you really think anyone on this site, will allow me to get away with what i posted... these guys are smart. Abreu has a sophmore slump and LaRoche can't adjust to AL pitching. The front office is not going to have guys on the bench or in AAA who can make up for the drop in run production. Injuries can totally change a team's success but so can off-years by your star players. Bench players are usally guys who can fill in for short periods. But if Sale has control issues and ends up a .500 pitcher next year, pretty tough to pull him and have a suitable replacement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted January 26, 2015 Author Share Posted January 26, 2015 QUOTE (SCCWS @ Jan 27, 2015 -> 12:06 AM) Abreu has a sophmore slump and LaRoche can't adjust to AL pitching. The front office is not going to have guys on the bench or in AAA who can make up for the drop in run production. Injuries can totally change a team's success but so can off-years by your star players. Bench players are usally guys who can fill in for short periods. But if Sale has control issues and ends up a .500 pitcher next year, pretty tough to pull him and have a suitable replacement. come on, you are trying to point out what i already have..... and do it in a different way. pls come up with some original to discuss. i am done responding to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted January 26, 2015 Author Share Posted January 26, 2015 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 26, 2015 -> 11:39 PM) The Dodgers lost the most money of any team in MLB, something like $80 or $90 million last year. there whole money for salary is being subsidize from the tv deal alone. what is it, 200 mil or more for the tv deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted January 26, 2015 Author Share Posted January 26, 2015 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 26, 2015 -> 11:21 PM) 2006 should be the goal, not 2005. Attendance-wise, there's always a one year lag to catch up, especially with new season ticket packages after the WS. great point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Jan 26, 2015 -> 03:53 PM) Sox pulling out stops to bump attendance http://t.co/hjEmvgGGib https://twitter.com/ESPNChiSox/status/559790322784292864 Maybe I understood this incorrectly because I skimmed the article, but tickets are all digital now? That sucks. It's a tradition for my Dad and I to keep out ticket stubs and write down anything memorable that happened during the game on the back of the ticket. I have a few of those computer printed tickets, and they just look cheap and don't fit nicely with all the regular sized tickets. Also, I have my ticket from Buehrle's no-hitter framed and I think that frame would look awfully dumb with a computer printed ticket behind the class. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted January 26, 2015 Author Share Posted January 26, 2015 QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Jan 26, 2015 -> 11:39 PM) Maybe I understood this incorrectly because I skimmed the article, but tickets are all digital now? That sucks. It's a tradition for my Dad and I to keep out ticket stubs and write down anything memorable that happened during the game on the back of the ticket. I have a few of those computer printed tickets, and they just look cheap and don't fit nicely with all the regular sized tickets. Also, I have my ticket from Buehrle's no-hitter framed and I think that frame would look awfully dumb with a computer printed ticket behind the class. oh man that is old school and what a great memorable piece for history.... to show any one kids. i got to give you credit for have the due diligence to do that, and to save them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.