https://www.forbes.com/teams/chicago-white-sox/?list=mlb-valuations

Sox lost $40 million on paper last year. I will guess that this will be the last year of "losing" as they will have their TV contract in place again for a full season, and have cut pretty much every cost possible, and are one of the cheapest payrolls in all of MLB. The wild thing is that if you add up the six years of losses, that adds up to $212 million, according to Forbes. Note that the team is now up to a debt ratio of 8%? I used to doubt these numbers a lot more, but if the Sox weren't losing money, why would they have an operations debt for a guy like Ishbia to come in and pay off?

The other number of note is the $239 million revenue number. Sounds like a lot right? The hapless Miami Marlins, last in MLB team value, had a revenue of $320 million, or essentially the entirety of the Sox payroll MORE than the White Sox. The Sox are last by a LONG SHOT in total revenue. The closest to the White Sox is Tampa, who didn't even play in an MLB stadium last year, but still brought home $290 million or almost 20% more than our Sox. Even the A's brought in $320 million.

If you want a mark of how badly the Sox have been destroyed under Jerry Reinsdorf, there it is.

2 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

https://www.forbes.com/teams/chicago-white-sox/?list=mlb-valuations

Sox lost $40 million on paper last year. I will guess that this will be the last year of "losing" as they will have their TV contract in place again for a full season, and have cut pretty much every cost possible, and are one of the cheapest payrolls in all of MLB. The wild thing is that if you add up the six years of losses, that adds up to $212 million, according to Forbes. Note that the team is now up to a debt ratio of 8%? I used to doubt these numbers a lot more, but if the Sox weren't losing money, why would they have an operations debt for a guy like Ishbia to come in and pay off?

The other number of note is the $239 million revenue number. Sounds like a lot right? The hapless Miami Marlins, last in MLB team value, had a revenue of $320 million, or essentially the entirety of the Sox payroll MORE than the White Sox. The Sox are last by a LONG SHOT in total revenue. The closest to the White Sox is Tampa, who didn't even play in an MLB stadium last year, but still brought home $290 million or almost 20% more than our Sox. Even the A's brought in $320 million.

If you want a mark of how badly the Sox have been destroyed under Jerry Reinsdorf, there it is.

Seems crazy if you consider owning all the parking lots.

And nothing has been done yet to attract Japanese sponsors...disappointing to say the least.

If you ran a business as poorly as JR has run this one, you'd probably have closed a long time ago. I hope he's losing money. He's earned it.

1. NYM -$214 million

2. Toronto -71

3. NYY -53

4. Philly -52

5. Houston -45

6. Texas -44 (spinning wheels after WS)

7. White Sox (small market behavior)

8. AZ -31 (trapped between markets)

9. LAD -21 (haha)

10. Wash -15 (in trouble?)

11. LAA -14

12. SDP -1 (getting financial house in order for sale)

Brooks Boyer luckiest man on the face of the earth!!!! How is he not fired?????

#21-30 fascinating

All (some highly) profitable small market teams

MIL DET Minnesota TB COL CLE KCR Pitt Cincy Miami

Edited 19 hours ago19 hr by caulfield12

1 hour ago, southsider2k5 said:

https://www.forbes.com/teams/chicago-white-sox/?list=mlb-valuations

Sox lost $40 million on paper last year. I will guess that this will be the last year of "losing" as they will have their TV contract in place again for a full season, and have cut pretty much every cost possible, and are one of the cheapest payrolls in all of MLB. The wild thing is that if you add up the six years of losses, that adds up to $212 million, according to Forbes. Note that the team is now up to a debt ratio of 8%? I used to doubt these numbers a lot more, but if the Sox weren't losing money, why would they have an operations debt for a guy like Ishbia to come in and pay off?

The other number of note is the $239 million revenue number. Sounds like a lot right? The hapless Miami Marlins, last in MLB team value, had a revenue of $320 million, or essentially the entirety of the Sox payroll MORE than the White Sox. The Sox are last by a LONG SHOT in total revenue. The closest to the White Sox is Tampa, who didn't even play in an MLB stadium last year, but still brought home $290 million or almost 20% more than our Sox. Even the A's brought in $320 million.

If you want a mark of how badly the Sox have been destroyed under Jerry Reinsdorf, there it is.

I'm shocked that the ballpark's acres of surface lots and proximity to expressway off ramps aren't vaulting the Sox to near the top of the list. /s

Note that the White Sox are the ONLY team that has lost valuation on Forbes's list from last year. In fact, they've lost valuation two years in a row according to the article. Way to go Jerry!

I wonder if the Ishbias have locked in a sale price with Reinsdorf since JR has been saying he wants to stick around as long as possible and Ishbia's first controlling option to buy year isn't for another eight years (2034).

Edited 18 hours ago18 hr by 77 Hitmen

1 hour ago, Dick Allen said:

If you ran a business as poorly as JR has run this one, you'd probably have closed a long time ago. I hope he's losing money. He's earned it.

The crazy thing is, if he had ACTUALLY invested in this business, he could have literally doubled his final selling price. The reports were in the two billion range for the previous shares. The Padres are rumored to be in the $3.4 BILLION range. The Sox SHOULD be in that area, even with splitting Chicago, there is nothing the San Diego market that should be better than the southside. Its ridiculous, and he SHOULD be called out on this.

“San Diego, in a lot of respects, is emblematic of what people around the world see as the California lifestyle,” says Martin. “San Diego is seen as a major market, a major brand with, if we're being honest, some of the biggest stars in the entire sport.”

We’re looking at you, Fernando Tatis Jr. and Manny Machado!

The fact that the new owners are also purchasing 30% of Petco Park and a chunk of its revenue generating power also bumps the value up. However, the biggest factor in why the Padres are almost inevitably going to set a new baseball team sales record is really based in Economics 101.

“There's a very finite resource and the reality is that, even as expensive as they are, there are more people with the multiple billions of dollars required to buy these sports franchises than there are sports franchises available to be purchased,” says Martin. “It's purely supply and demand. The demand way outstrips the supply.”

It is worth noting that, if the Dodgers or Yankees went up for sale tomorrow, they would undoubtedly set yet another sales record. But, for now, San Diego is going to be the most valuable MLB team in history.

https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/are-the-san-diego-padres-really-worth-more-than-the-new-york-mets-or-los-angeles-dodgers/4005233/

www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DfBSiuBhMPAA&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwj0z_3z9tmTAxUODEQIHTA9EU4QFnoECAgQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1PkcCJV2va4lDZoEcxhkWN

Edited 16 hours ago16 hr by caulfield12

Bid competition (4-5 groups） see Minn/CHW lack thereof

Scarcity of CA franchises to go up for sale

Attractiveness of state for some billionaires

30% facility share

Top 3-5 stadium #2 attendance

ball park village evolving/party or festive atmosphere

Recognizable intl. star names on roster locked into contracts (also a negative in case of Darvish Bogaerts Musgrove Cronenworth right now)

Machado Tatis Merrill

Rivalry with LAD since 2019

great/expanding set of corporate sponsors hips & promotional tie-ins

but also one of the very worst if not THE worst farm systems

GM with proven ability to identify and sign Latin American talent/pipeline history

Edited 15 hours ago15 hr by caulfield12

I have to imagine when Ishbia takes over he's going to clean house with people like Boyer.

1 hour ago, almagest said:

I have to imagine when Ishbia takes over he's going to clean house with people like Boyer.

There's no time like the present...

3 hours ago, almagest said:

I have to imagine when Ishbia takes over he's going to clean house with people like Boyer.

He'll probably be canning a boatload of folks from the baseball side if for no other reason new owners like to hire their own people who they feel will be loyal to them.

Not that most if not all of the folks who will be let go deserve to be drawing unemployment.

Jerry fired the two Bull's execs.

17 minutes ago, oldsox said:

Jerry fired the two Bull's execs.

Getz isn't very close to going anywhere though...still at least two more rebuilding seasons.

1 hour ago, oldsox said:

Jerry fired the two Bull's execs.

Supposedly, it should be Michael Reinsdorf but I won’t argue with you on who ultimately makes the decisions.

In any case, the Reinsdorf’s seem to be quicker to pull the trigger on the Bulls front office than the White Sox.

In any case, Karnisovas and Eversley went 224-254 over 6 seasons. It was time.

Yearly reminder that most of these numbers are completely made-up

Edited 8 hours ago8 hr by Buehrle>Wood

10 minutes ago, Buehrle>Wood said:

Yearly reminder that most of these numbers are completely made-up

Except the Sox just got sold because of operations debt, meaning there is some decent accuracy here.

1 hour ago, southsider2k5 said:

Except the Sox just got sold because of operations debt, meaning there is some decent accuracy here.

Same with the Twins partial sale, in which $500M in debt was a factor. That doesn't sound like the usual accounting trickery to me.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6892645/2025/12/16/twins-partial-sale-finances-debt-update/

9 hours ago, almagest said:

I have to imagine when Ishbia takes over he's going to clean house with people like Boyer.

5 hours ago, Lip Man 1 said:

He'll probably be canning a boatload of folks from the baseball side if for no other reason new owners like to hire their own people who they feel will be loyal to them.

Not that most if not all of the folks who will be let go deserve to be drawing unemployment.

The way the Sox are so poorly operated, I can only imagine there will be a massive house cleaning throughout the organization after Ishbia finally takes over.

1 hour ago, 77 Hitmen said:

The way the Sox are so poorly operated, I can only imagine there will be a massive house cleaning throughout the organization after Ishbia finally takes over.

How do you know the organization is poorly operated ? the W/L record? OK, but there is no doubt that major aspects of the White Sox organization are run very well and that is part of the reason that our fan base has remained loyal over the years.

Maybe Ishbia will fork out hundreds of millions to guarantee large FA player contracts. I have the sense that he is buying it to turn and sell it for profit like private equity investors do. For Ishbia, it is all about the money and the things that money can buy. Never forget that.

https://www.reddit.com/r/illinois/comments/12rc0xu/billionaires_winnetka_home_to_be_most_expensive/

Read the comments in that link. Hilarious.

Edited 3 hours ago3 hr by tray

Way back in 2012, with the team facing imminent bankruptcy after Frank McCourt siphoned funds from the club to finance his divorce, MLB awarded the Dodgers a favorable deal to pull themselves out of a hole. The following season, they would be permitted to treat their media revenue as a maximum of $84 million for revenue-sharing purposes, a figure that would increase by 4% each year thereafter. This deal would continue for the following 25 years. (Note: yes, that is a ludicrous period of time for this kind of deal.)

In 2017, MLB realized the folly of their ways and adjusted the initial starting point to $130 million, but even that has proven to be an insufficient change. The Dodgers' TV Deal with Spectrum far exceeds that; it's valued at $8.35 billion over 25 years, or $334 million per year. Here's how that looks over the course of the 25-year period, with all values below in millions:

2033	$334.00	?	$273.90	?
2034	$334.00	?	$284.80	?
2035	$334.00	?	$29620	?
2036	$334.00	?	$308.10	?
2037	$334.00	?	$320.40	?
2038	$334.00	?	$333.20	?

With 48% of all teams' local revenues being shared, the Dodgers are saving over $60 million per year even now, halfway through this slow walk back to paying full freight. In the first year of Shohei Ohtani's contract, they saved the entire salary ($68 million) they deferred to after the end of Ohtani's deal in revenue-sharing avoidance alone. They were required to put that much into escrow, and they could easily do so, because they had all that extra cash they didn't have to pay into the league's shared pool. If the next CBA changes nothing about the fundamental revenue-sharing structure, the Dodgers will surpass $1 billion in cumulative savings in the first year of the new deal.

Another loophole in Major League Baseball’s revenue-sharing system involves local media deals, more generally. Clubs can manipulate revenue figures by acquiring partial ownership of the broadcasters that air their games. While revenue from local TV rights is subject to sharing across the league, profits generated through ownership stakes in the broadcasting networks are not. Instead, they are treated as a subsidiary/investment earning.

The most prominent example is the New York Yankees, who own a significant share of the YES Network. The network reportedly generates around $500 million annually, yet only about $200 million is included in the revenue-sharing calculations.

Other teams employing similar strategies include:

• Chicago Cubs – Marquee Sports Network

• Boston Red Sox – New England Sports Network

• Chicago White Sox – CHSN

• Atlanta Braves – Bally Sports South/Southeast

• Detroit Tigers – Bally Sports Detroit

• St. Louis Cardinals – Bally Sports Midwest

• Houston Astros – AT&T SportsNet Southwest

• Miami Marlins – Bally Sports Florida

Brewer Fanatic

MLB's Revenue-Sharing Model Has Two Big Problems. How Can...

Revenue sharing, in its current format, is effective—but two big loopholes compromise it. Could a performance-based reward address them?