Texsox

Sorry. The owners screw over taxpayers while pocketing huge profits in a protected monopoly. They should be required to pay back any economic incentives they received from profits when selling the team. The folks that deserve the biggest raises aren't a part of these negotiations. They are the office workers, stadium crew, sub contractors, etc. The second most deserving group are the fans that pay for all this. When elephants fight it's the grass that gets trampled. You missed my posts where I said I don't care which side wins, they both suck.

Now shall we look at some players and see how well they did? If we all agree that a corporation shouldn't make 100 million how much should one individual be allowed to make? How about a limit that the highest paid employee can only make 50x the lowest earning.

In the end the players will gain a little, the owners will lose a little. The game will go on.

Do you think the players would honor other picket lines?

So would you support the players and not go to games played by non union players or support the vendors, ticket takers, etc and go to games?

X2 I remember when people here felt that the union auto workers in Detroit were paid too much to assemble a car. I still don't care who gets what in the negotiations, I just want it over and continue building next year's roster.

Which is like saying players can quit and find a better paying job ?

I think everyone should. And profits should be controlled by the government.

So owning a team should not involve turning a profit or having your assets appreciate in value?

How much of a return is fair? US stocks are up about 25% this year. Is that a fair target? Limiting profits can benefit society in a lot of ways. Imagine if everyone in the Sox organization has a $575,000 minimum annual salary instead of $7.25 hour. I'd be way more interested in arguing for a MLB minimum wage for all employees who 20% over the livable wage rate for their location.

The days when MLB team ownership involved risk was a long time ago. Opportunity loss is more of an issue. Compared to other investments, are MLB teams below average, average, or above average investments? Should owners be allowed a profit compared to the stock market? Real Estate? Savings account? Owning other companies?

Sure Jack. How much more per year is a baseball player worth to society compared to you? A cop? An accountant? 10 times more? 100 times more? 1,000 times more?

I agree with more of the player points but don't mind at all if they don't achieve any or all of their demands. To me coal miners or air traffic controllers striking for safer working conditions gets me to care. Selfishly I'd rather the owners prevail because any system that favors free agent signings and larger salaries works against a franchise like the Sox who aren't a destination franchise with a proven track record of above average free agents. At least under this ownership group. To me cheering for the players to win this is cheering for continued mediocrity from the Sox. The quicker the Sox lose player control the faster our better players will be someone else's. And we'll be signing less talented young players and aging veterans to short term, incentive heavy contracts to replace them.

Anyone compare their net worth year to year? This was the biggest percentage increase I've had in my lifetime. Between home prices in my area and stock prices in my managed funds, it was a very good year. If I hadn't decided to begin some trading on my own it would have been a little better. So thank you previous administration for pumping so much money into the economy and thank you current administration for lowering my blood pressure.

I've worked at two startups where the owners had literally everything they owned used as collateral. I didn't begrudge then their success. Sports teams are a bit different. They have a monopoly and a built in system that keeps teams from putting other teams out of business. The competition isn't for revenues for the most part. I believe for the majority of teams their profits are high enough that they could increase salaries for all of their employees. Being an athlete is also a bit different than other jobs. We could solve hunger in the world if we capped entertainer's salaries and used the excess to feed people. We spend a lot of money for people to entertain us. I compare their salaries to the average American and I don't have any energy to claim they should be earning more. Already rich people are fighting over making one group slight less rich and another group slightly more rich. It's not quite the French Revolution. If there was a proposal on the table that teams had to set aside 25% of their revenues for charitable work, I'd passionately take a side. But it's literally the only MLB topic to really discuss. I can't wait for my high school team to get started.

I feel like FlaSoxxJim felt everytime someone did some real bat ass crazy stuff and they weren't from Florida. This seems like something that should have happened here in Texas. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/school-mysterious-ohio-football-team-played-espn-scam-officials-say-rcna9257?utm_campaign=mb&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_source=morning_brew "Let's skip past the whole education thing and just focus on Football." At least there wasn't any grade fixing like the 1988 Bishop High team.

Why have a draft at all? Free agent from the start. Fortunately money has never stopped this team from competing.

Which Sox current players do you believe should have received larger contracts? Garcia? Toss a few million more to him? How about getting Grandal over $20 mil? Luis? Let’s make him a free agent next season so he can grab a quick$100 mil. Vaughn? $4 mil next season. Will higher salaries and a greater emphasis on free agents help or hurt the Sox?

Basic business success. Either charge more or lower your costs. Yes, they can’t charge more. Now players are getting a higher percentage of the revenues, whose pocket will that come out of? Owners? Front office? Other employees? Fans?

Yet those top guys are the ones who will benefit the most by getting to free agency sooner.

So which players are underpaid? Which Sox players are we wishing had bigger contacts? And how will that make us more competitive?

Leury should be earning 8 mil a year. He would have hit free agency sooner.

When elephants fight it's the grass that gets trampled. Players becoming free agents sooner and with larger contracts will benefit teams willing to pay top dollar on long term contracts. The Sox ownership group will pivot from decades of low spending on short term deals and crush the new business model with mega free agent deals.

Still the worse traffic imaginable. Housing prices are still cheaper.

San Antonio to Dallas is about the worst drive imaginable. When I relocated in the late 90s housing was about 40% less than the Chicago suburbs.