Lip Man 1 Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 (edited) Not commenting on the political notation in the original post one way or the other but I was intrigued by the figures. If this is true and I have no idea if it is, that puts a little different spin on the White Sox situation doesn't it? Post was originally sent by a Cub fan very upset with Ricketts ownership. Edited October 14 by Lip Man 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dam8610 Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 That says to me that this team could very easily afford a $250m annual payroll. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxfest Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 JR being JR year after year but cries poor me. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteSox2023 Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 (edited) So isn’t this proof that the Sox aren’t actually “losing money” as has been stated in other threads? They just aren’t making the revenue that they expected or want. Hence the slashing of payroll to Marlins levels. Will be interesting to see the 2025 revenue numbers. Edited October 14 by WhiteSox2023 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 49 minutes ago, WhiteSox2023 said: So isn’t this proof that the Sox aren’t actually “losing money” as has been stated in other threads? They just aren’t making the revenue that they expected or want. Hence the slashing of payroll to Marlins levels. Will be interesting to see the 2025 revenue numbers. No, it isn't. Payroll is not a teams only expense, far from it. It's not a complete comparison. It would be like comparing your paycheck to your car payment and then calling yourself rich. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteSox2023 Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 5 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said: No, it isn't. Payroll is not a teams only expense, far from it. It's not a complete comparison. It would be like comparing your paycheck to your car payment and then calling yourself rich. Sure, but do you think those other expenses account for the $190 million dollar difference? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 6 minutes ago, WhiteSox2023 said: Sure, but do you think those other expenses account for the $190 million dollar difference? First off, I am not sure why this guy is comparing 25 payroll to 24 revenue. 2nd, Forbes does. Note 5 years off losses. I am going to put more trust in them vs bitter fans. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lip Man 1 Posted October 14 Author Share Posted October 14 2 hours ago, Dam8610 said: That says to me that this team could very easily afford a $250m annual payroll. Even I think 250 million is a stretch (but perhaps not with Ishbia running things) but I think 190-200 is doable if ownership actually wanted to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lip Man 1 Posted October 14 Author Share Posted October 14 1 hour ago, WhiteSox2023 said: Sure, but do you think those other expenses account for the $190 million dollar difference? And remember the nice stadium agreement the Sox have with the state of Illinois, JR owning the parking lots and their investment in the minor leagues and development has been "slim" for a number of years. Also during the initial rebuild during those three years the Sox had among the lowest payrolls in baseball and one year did have the lowest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
77 Hitmen Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 (edited) 13 hours ago, southsider2k5 said: No, it isn't. Payroll is not a teams only expense, far from it. It's not a complete comparison. It would be like comparing your paycheck to your car payment and then calling yourself rich. 13 hours ago, WhiteSox2023 said: Sure, but do you think those other expenses account for the $190 million dollar difference? The following article suggests that idea isn't totally outlandish: https://www.baseballamerica.com/stories/what-the-pirates-twins-finances-reveal-about-mlbs-revenue-divide/ In the story, he reported that the team had total operating revenues of $292.4 million in 2024, had an MLB CBT payroll of just under $123 million (which is salaries for the full 40-man roster plus benefits and other expenses) and actually lost money. And he means actual losses. That $2.2 million loss does not include debt service, depreciation or capital expenditures that could create larger losses for accounting purposes. According to Kovacevic, the Pirates lost $2.2 million in 2024 because MLB salaries and benefits were just 41.7% of the team’s total expenses. The team had $171.7 million in additional costs for administrative expenses, travel, draft and international signing bonuses, minor league player payrolls, stadium costs and more. According to the story, the Pirates’ debt is at the highest mark of Bob Nutting’s tenure because of loans taken out during the coronavirus pandemic. Edited October 14 by 77 Hitmen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 Remember the Pirates are a revenue sharing/receiving team while the White Sox certainly are not... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WBWSF Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 That 277 million dollars is not telling the whole story. They're not counting the national TV money and merchandise money. The total revenue is closer to $400 million dollars. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 8 hours ago, 77 Hitmen said: Does that mean The following article suggests that idea isn't totally outlandish: https://www.baseballamerica.com/stories/what-the-pirates-twins-finances-reveal-about-mlbs-revenue-divide/ In the story, he reported that the team had total operating revenues of $292.4 million in 2024, had an MLB CBT payroll of just under $123 million (which is salaries for the full 40-man roster plus benefits and other expenses) and actually lost money. And he means actual losses. That $2.2 million loss does not include debt service, depreciation or capital expenditures that could create larger losses for accounting purposes. According to Kovacevic, the Pirates lost $2.2 million in 2024 because MLB salaries and benefits were just 41.7% of the team’s total expenses. The team had $171.7 million in additional costs for administrative expenses, travel, draft and international signing bonuses, minor league player payrolls, stadium costs and more. According to the story, the Pirates’ debt is at the highest mark of Bob Nutting’s tenure because of loans taken out during the coronavirus pandemic. It does. I will say this clearly, again. Jerry Reinsdorf had to prematurely bring on a new buyer for a capital infusion to pay for operations losses turning into operations debt. YOU DON'T ACCUMULATE DEBT FOR PAPER LOSSES! No is is faking losses by faking debt and pissing away interest payments. This is real. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
77 Hitmen Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 3 hours ago, WBWSF said: That 277 million dollars is not telling the whole story. They're not counting the national TV money and merchandise money. The total revenue is closer to $400 million dollars. That's not correct according to the article linked within the article I linked above. It IS part of the Pirates total revenue of $292M while their total expenses, even with their small MLB payroll, are $294M. https://dkpittsburghsports.com/team/site-stuff/feed?page=0&content=pirates-losing-money-bob-nutting-investigation-mlb-dk All 30 teams are required to pay 48% of that local operating revenue into a general pool that gets divvied up evenly later. That way, the super-rich teams like the Dodgers, Yankees and Mets give up a ton, and the poorer teams like the Pirates, Marlins and Rays get back way more than they submitted. It’s part of baseball’s attempt at leveling the financial playing field. So the Pirates, per this formula, put $70.4 million into this pool, and what gets distributed back to them is $121.9 million. The difference between those two amounts is a plus of $51.6 million, a figure that’s now essentially part of their national revenue. The next two streams are much simpler, as they’re the same for all teams: National TV brings $61.1 million, and sponsorships, merchandise and other elements add up to $24.8 million. Sprinkle on top $8.3 million from a portion of the luxury tax that’s distributed only to lower-revenue teams. Total operating revenues: $292.4 million. .... Total operating expenses: $294.6 million Difference between operating revenues and expenses: Minus-$2.2 million Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
77 Hitmen Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 (edited) 3 hours ago, southsider2k5 said: It does. I will say this clearly, again. Jerry Reinsdorf had to prematurely bring on a new buyer for a capital infusion to pay for operations losses turning into operations debt. YOU DON'T ACCUMULATE DEBT FOR PAPER LOSSES! No is is faking losses by faking debt and pissing away interest payments. This is real. Yeah, and there's also the whole Twins sale debacle where the Pohlads had one buyer back out and then couldn't find another buyer for the team before they decided to keep the team and bring in additional investors. That doesn't happen because of "paper losses". So much for the theory that there are lots of billionaires out there waiting in the wings who would jump at the chance to join the exclusive club of owning one of only 30 MLB teams because they're all such huge money makers and great investments. Hey, don't get me wrong, I don't feel sorry for Jerry Reinsdorf one bit. He squandered away a respectable market share and strong fan loyalty over the years with all his terrible decisions and actions and has essentially turned the Sox into a small market team within a major market. His predicament is self-inflicted. But just pulling up tables with team revenue vs. major league payroll and saying "SEE!! ALL THE SMALL MARKET TEAMS ARE MAKING HUGE PROFITS " isn't painting an accurate picture. As I've said before, I find it to be an incredible coincidence that the "cheap" MLB owners are almost exclusively in smaller markets and the ones willing to spend huge amounts on MLB payroll are almost exclusively in the major markets. Sure, you have some major market teams who are flops (Angels) and some small market teams punching way above their weight (Brewers), but those are definitely outliers. Does that make Bob Nutting in Pittsburgh a good owner? Hell no, he could at least make his team as competitive as the Royals have been in recent years, but that's not saying much. Edited October 14 by 77 Hitmen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 1 hour ago, 77 Hitmen said: Yeah, and there's also the whole Twins sale debacle where the Pohlads had one buyer back out and then couldn't find another buyer for the team before they decided to keep the team and bring in additional investors. That doesn't happen because of "paper losses". So much for the theory that there are lots of billionaires out there waiting in the wings who would jump at the chance to join the exclusive club of owning one of only 30 MLB teams because they're all such huge money makers and great investments. Hey, don't get me wrong, I don't feel sorry for Jerry Reinsdorf one bit. He squandered away a respectable market share and strong fan loyalty over the years with all his terrible decisions and actions and has essentially turned the Sox into a small market team within a major market. His predicament is self-inflicted. But just pulling up tables with team revenue vs. major league payroll and saying "SEE!! ALL THE SMALL MARKET TEAMS ARE MAKING HUGE PROFITS " isn't painting an accurate picture. As I've said before, I find it to be an incredible coincidence that the "cheap" MLB owners are almost exclusively in smaller markets and the ones willing to spend huge amounts on MLB payroll are almost exclusively in the major markets. Sure, you have some major market teams who are flops (Angels) and some small market teams punching way above their weight (Brewers), but those are definitely outliers. Does that make Bob Nutting in Pittsburgh a good owner? Hell no, he could at least make his team as competitive as the Royals have been in recent years, but that's not saying much. If you listen to the 20 minute interview I posted in the other thread, Jerry went to Ishbia to set this deal up, so he was most responsible for killing the Twins deal. With retrospect, I have no idea if it happens or not without luring Ishbia back to the Sox, but Jerry initiated this deal to sell for one reason, and one reason only. He needed capital to stem operations losses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Look at Ray Ray Run Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 15 hours ago, 77 Hitmen said: The following article suggests that idea isn't totally outlandish: https://www.baseballamerica.com/stories/what-the-pirates-twins-finances-reveal-about-mlbs-revenue-divide/ In the story, he reported that the team had total operating revenues of $292.4 million in 2024, had an MLB CBT payroll of just under $123 million (which is salaries for the full 40-man roster plus benefits and other expenses) and actually lost money. And he means actual losses. That $2.2 million loss does not include debt service, depreciation or capital expenditures that could create larger losses for accounting purposes. According to Kovacevic, the Pirates lost $2.2 million in 2024 because MLB salaries and benefits were just 41.7% of the team’s total expenses. The team had $171.7 million in additional costs for administrative expenses, travel, draft and international signing bonuses, minor league player payrolls, stadium costs and more. According to the story, the Pirates’ debt is at the highest mark of Bob Nutting’s tenure because of loans taken out during the coronavirus pandemic. If we just use the 41% number, it would put there total operating expenses around 212 million making them profitable this year if they run the same/similar revenue numbers. Not sure where the 185 in player expenses is coming from for 2024. I also think it's very likely the Sox were under spending on the admin side so their salary-share-of-revenue is likely higher than the league avg at 41.7%. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Look at Ray Ray Run Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 (edited) 6 hours ago, southsider2k5 said: It does. I will say this clearly, again. Jerry Reinsdorf had to prematurely bring on a new buyer for a capital infusion to pay for operations losses turning into operations debt. YOU DON'T ACCUMULATE DEBT FOR PAPER LOSSES! No is is faking losses by faking debt and pissing away interest payments. This is real. I mean... if the tax gain on that loss is greater than the interest accumulation minus the taxable benefits of that interest then it would absolutely make sense to report paper losses while taking on debt and interest to pay for that loss. It's also not crazy to take on debt to clean up a balance sheet prior to sale which could also be playing a role. I certainly wouldn't say no one is doing that because that's not true. I'll edit to say capital has been expensive making this harder to do and it wouldn't be smart for someone who is actually running negative cash flows. Edited October 14 by Look at Ray Ray Run Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 jesus that has our revenue as the 2nd lowest in league while still being treated as a big market team. JR is so, so bad at this. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 16 minutes ago, bmags said: jesus that has our revenue as the 2nd lowest in league while still being treated as a big market team. JR is so, so bad at this. Yep, definitely the conclusion I came to when reading this. They’re so screwed until he sells. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 1 hour ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said: If we just use the 41% number, it would put there total operating expenses around 212 million making them profitable this year if they run the same/similar revenue numbers. Not sure where the 185 in player expenses is coming from for 2024. I also think it's very likely the Sox were under spending on the admin side so their salary-share-of-revenue is likely higher than the league avg at 41.7%. They didn't have TV money for like half of this season. Again, I do not know why this person decided comparing 2025 payroll to 2024 revenue was smart, but here we are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
almagest Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 43 minutes ago, bmags said: jesus that has our revenue as the 2nd lowest in league while still being treated as a big market team. JR is so, so bad at this. That's the real takeaway - there's no robber baron twirling his mustache while making money hand over fist. JR is an incompetent businessman at running an MLB team. There's no reason this team should only be ahead of the Athletics in revenue, and that's likely only because that team is in the middle of historically fucking over their fan base. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 4 minutes ago, almagest said: That's the real takeaway - there's no robber baron twirling his mustache while making money hand over fist. JR is an incompetent businessman at running an MLB team. There's no reason this team should only be ahead of the Athletics in revenue, and that's likely only because that team is in the middle of historically fucking over their fan base. Now this is a valid takeaway, and it's why the end of the Jerry Reinsdorf era can't come soon enough. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 (edited) 4 hours ago, bmags said: jesus that has our revenue as the 2nd lowest in league while still being treated as a big market team. JR is so, so bad at this. That was the case in 2024, when only the A's in their final season at the Coliseum were lower. How do you not beat the Rays Marlins Pirates etc.? Edited October 15 by caulfield12 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaliSoxFanViaSWside Posted October 15 Share Posted October 15 On 10/13/2025 at 5:46 PM, Dam8610 said: That says to me that this team could very easily afford a $250m annual payroll. 2nd lowest revenue and only 6 teams are over $250M payroll. According to your math what does it say about the rest of baseball ? 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.