southsider2k5 Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 QUOTE (striker @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 10:28 AM) Time for a Redsox/Dodgers Blue Jays/Marlins roster swap Sox Get: Inciarte, Teheran, Markakis, Aybar Braves Get: Danks, LaRoche, Fullmer, Danish, Engel, Garcia, Sanchez Sox Get: Segura, Braun, Will Smith, Jimmy Nelson, $ Brewers Get: Anderson, Adams, Sanchez, Danks, Garcia, couple other prospects White Sox? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptatc Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 08:30 AM) Are you still in the camp that really believes we're getting Cespedes or Upton? I'll ask this. Other than maybe 2005-2007, when has the White Sox payroll expanded 10-15% over two consecutive seasons...in this case, losing seasons where the team profits were low or marginal compared to that time period? 2009, when we added Peavy and Rios, we were coming off a playoff appearance. 2011, we were coming off a season where we led the division for a large chunk of time. The only other time would have to have been 2013-2014 with Abreu (and then last offseason), but I'm pretty sure overall payroll decreased significantly despite that addition as we shed a lot of payroll throughout a disappointing 2013. NASCAR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 09:44 AM) You like to site Forbes. Their numbers from the 2015 season aren't out, but 2014, according to them was profitable by 31.9 million. Can you let us know the P & L for 2015? Why don't you at least take 30 seconds to look something up once in a while? Your built in conclusions are almost always incorrect. And that $31.9 million was invested into LaRoche, Cabrera, Robertson, Samardzija's deal, Duke, Bonifacio and Beckham. There's no way they made a profit last year. They couldn't even get legit offers on a lot of sponsorships and moved on instead of giving massive discounts that would be harder to raise price-wise in the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 10:36 AM) And that $31.9 million was invested into LaRoche, Cabrera, Robertson, Samardzija's deal, Duke, Bonifacio and Beckham. There's no way they made a profit last year. They couldn't even get legit offers on a lot of sponsorships and moved on instead of giving massive discounts that would be harder to raise price-wise in the future. If they broke even or lost $10 million, they still, even after signing these players, would be up over $20 million over the 2 year period. What were the sponsorships they lost out on? Do you have any links ? And what is the cost say to be the sponsor of the now Home Plate Club or the restaurant/bar in the parking lot? Edited January 7, 2016 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackmooncreeping Posted January 7, 2016 Author Share Posted January 7, 2016 QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 08:54 AM) Gordon wasn't coming to the Sox. He had his heart set on staying in KC and they eventually ponied up. Sox could have offered 4 years and $80 million (which is the most I would have offered) and I believe he stays in KC still. completely agree, Gordo never wanted to leave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 11:36 AM) And that $31.9 million was invested into LaRoche, Cabrera, Robertson, Samardzija's deal, Duke, Bonifacio and Beckham. There's no way they made a profit last year. They couldn't even get legit offers on a lot of sponsorships and moved on instead of giving massive discounts that would be harder to raise price-wise in the future. IMO they probably made a moderate profit. They had enough room to consider adding payroll at the deadline and were not in a position where they were forced to cut payroll (as we saw them saying in 2013). They had a legitimate boost of several thousand season ticket sales last year. That's revenue in addition to the money that was made as profit with the lower payroll in 2013. That plus some advertising sales before the season started and the team fell apart probably kept them in the black all year even with the higher payroll. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 Maybe. If there was a profit, it was more related to their 40% ownership and share of Comcast profits related to the Cubs' surge in ratings and advertising rates than those extra season ticket sales. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 01:22 PM) Maybe. If there was a profit, it was more related to their 40% ownership and share of Comcast profits related to the Cubs' surge in ratings and advertising rates than those extra season ticket sales. QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 11:36 AM) * And that $31.9 million was invested into LaRoche, Cabrera, Robertson, Samardzija's deal, Duke, Bonifacio and Beckham. There's no way they made a profit last year. They couldn't even get legit offers on a lot of sponsorships and moved on instead of giving massive discounts that would be harder to raise price-wise in the future. Your very next post. No way they made a profit to maybe. And they White Sox don't own 40% of CSN. They own 20%. But if you want to add the Bulls bottom line to the White Sox, that would be more reason for you to never ever mention season tickets or payroll or anything financial again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 I work in the Minor Leagues, and I certainly do not have anything like credible knowledge of MLB teams revenue/finances, but I do end up coming in contact with some of the executives from time to time and have been part of a few interesting discussions. One of my favorite things is how everyone laughs anytime someone brings up the Forbes projections of team value and revenue. It appears there's a pretty clear consensus that those numbers are a joke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 You can go with Balta's argument if you prefer. There's still not enough revenue from last year to justify deliberately going into a loss of $10-15 million unless they felt the potential season ticket gain would be worth it. The closer we get to the regular season, the smaller the bounce. They've already missed the Christmas gift season window. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 01:40 PM) You can go with Balta's argument if you prefer. There's still not enough revenue from last year to justify deliberately going into a loss of $10-15 million unless they felt the potential season ticket gain would be worth it. The closer we get to the regular season, the smaller the bounce. They've already missed the Christmas gift season window. The season ticket Christmas gift. LMAO. Yeah, there are thousands of people who hand out professional sports season ticket packages as Christmas gifts. You know what we should get our 8 year old for Christmas honey? White Sox season tickets. He's been a good boy, lets get him Platinum boxes. I really thought your GM must have at least been a varsity starter on the HS baseball team took the cake, but you still are making even more stuff up that makes no sense every day. Congratulations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 01:39 PM) I work in the Minor Leagues, and I certainly do not have anything like credible knowledge of MLB teams revenue/finances, but I do end up coming in contact with some of the executives from time to time and have been part of a few interesting discussions. One of my favorite things is how everyone laughs anytime someone brings up the Forbes projections of team value and revenue. It appears there's a pretty clear consensus that those numbers are a joke. There's certainly a clear argument to be made that overall team revenues (and underlying values) are growing at a much faster pace than the player percentage or share. So you either have collusion to hold down the salaries for outfielders right now or distortion in the equilibrium between supply and demand or simply the fact that some teams prioritize profitability more than winning and vice-versa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 01:44 PM) The season ticket Christmas gift. LMAO. Yeah, there are thousands of people who hand out professional sports season ticket packages as Christmas gifts. You know what we should get our 8 year old for Christmas honey? White Sox season tickets. He's been a good boy, lets get him Platinum boxes. I really thought your GM must have at least been a varsity starter on the HS baseball team took the cake, but you still are making even more stuff up that makes no sense every day. Congratulations. Platinum boxes and luxury suites versus partial season ticket plans are clearly the same thing....most White Sox fans must be swimming in so much money they no longer need to budget or plan ahead of time on allocating precious resources on season tickets. Why don't you call your season ticket rep and ask where they are +/- with ticket sales at this point last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 01:39 PM) I work in the Minor Leagues, and I certainly do not have anything like credible knowledge of MLB teams revenue/finances, but I do end up coming in contact with some of the executives from time to time and have been part of a few interesting discussions. One of my favorite things is how everyone laughs anytime someone brings up the Forbes projections of team value and revenue. It appears there's a pretty clear consensus that those numbers are a joke. MLB teams are never going to admit to making tons of money. The proof is in pudding. Whether the Forbes thing is accurate is obviously debateable, the fact is their team values and where they are actually sold when they are sold usually shows the "value" if you want to define value as what they would get if they are sold is always reported lower than reality. There is no question these teams all make money. How many times did Hawk praise Bud Selig and talk about how everyone is making money? There was one time KW said the Forbes stuff was way off, but then used Forbes when Forbes said they Sox used the highest percentage of its revenue on player payroll. Edited January 7, 2016 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 01:50 PM) Platinum boxes and luxury suites versus partial season ticket plans are clearly the same thing....most White Sox fans must be swimming in so much money they no longer need to budget or plan ahead of time on allocating precious resources on season tickets. Why don't you call your season ticket rep and ask where they are +/- with ticket sales at this point last year. I'm sure they would love to give that information to me. The Sox will lose some of the $207 plans but even if they lost 3000 of them, which they don't even have, that barely covers a minimum salary player. Why don't you call the season ticket office and get to the bottom of it. You are the one who can't stop mentioning selling season tickets. How many posters here have received White Sox season tickets as a Christmas gift. Not tickets to a game or two, but full blown season tickets? I bet you could count them on one hand. Edited January 7, 2016 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 02:22 PM) Maybe. If there was a profit, it was more related to their 40% ownership and share of Comcast profits related to the Cubs' surge in ratings and advertising rates than those extra season ticket sales. Don't forget that compared to 2013 when they took an approximate loss or were close to breaking even on a $120 million payroll to open the year, when they actually moved people to cut payroll, there's an extra $25 million in revenue shared money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 02:53 PM) MLB teams are never going to admit to making tons of money. The proof is in pudding. Whether the Forbes thing is accurate is obviously debateable, the fact is their team values and where they are actually sold when they are sold usually shows the "value" if you want to define value as what they would get if they are sold is always reported lower than reality. There is no question these teams all make money. How many times did Hawk praise Bud Selig and talk about how everyone is making money? There was one time KW said the Forbes stuff was way off, but then used Forbes when Forbes said they Sox used the highest percentage of its revenue on player payroll. Exactly. The whole thing is PR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lip Man 1 Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 (edited) MLB is swimming in revenue. They are a money making machine right now. As Tom Verducci pointed out in S.I. MLB's revenue is up 102% from 15 years ago. Before he left 'Proud to be your Bud' Selig said MLB was now a nine Billion dollar a year industry. Any team crying "poor" is lying through their teeth. Mark Edited January 7, 2016 by Lip Man 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 QUOTE (Lip Man 1 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 09:00 PM) MLB is swimming in revenue. They are a money making machine right now. As Tom Verducci pointed out in S.I. MLB's revenue is up 102% from 15 years ago. Before he left 'Proud to be your Bud' Selig said MLB was now a nine Billion dollar a year industry. Any team crying "poor" is lying through their teeth. Mark nice post...... many thanks for the voice of reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank_Thomas Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 Ryan Braun anyone (probably costs too much) "Brewers “would not hesitate” to trade Ryan Braun | HardballTalk" via http://TeamStre.am by Bleacher Report http://teamstre.am/1IViYBE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackmooncreeping Posted January 9, 2016 Author Share Posted January 9, 2016 QUOTE (Frank_Thomas35 @ Jan 8, 2016 -> 08:47 PM) Ryan Braun anyone (probably costs too much) "Brewers “would not hesitate” to trade Ryan Braun | HardballTalk" via http://TeamStre.am by Bleacher Report http://teamstre.am/1IViYBE If the Brewers send a truckload of cash AND take Laroche...maybe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSox13 Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 QUOTE (Frank_Thomas35 @ Jan 8, 2016 -> 08:47 PM) Ryan Braun anyone (probably costs too much) "Brewers “would not hesitate” to trade Ryan Braun | HardballTalk" via http://TeamStre.am by Bleacher Report http://teamstre.am/1IViYBE I would take Braun in a second but like you said, he probably costs too much. Doubtful the Sox would be willing to part with what the Brewers would desire in a trade. Still yet, fun thought to ponder over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSox13 Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 QUOTE (blackmooncreeping @ Jan 8, 2016 -> 08:49 PM) If the Brewers send a truckload of cash AND take Laroche...maybe I would take on the contract if it meant the Sox could unload LaRoche and limit the prospect quality the Brewers would seek in return, iow, they can't have Anderson or Fulmer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Jan 8, 2016 -> 09:02 PM) I would take on the contract if it meant the Sox could unload LaRoche and limit the prospect quality the Brewers would seek in return, iow, they can't have Anderson or Fulmer. They just signed Carter for $2.5 million and incentives. Pedro Alvarez is still out there. LaRoche is stuck for better or worse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (Lip Man 1 @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 03:00 PM) MLB is swimming in revenue. They are a money making machine right now. As Tom Verducci pointed out in S.I. MLB's revenue is up 102% from 15 years ago. Before he left 'Proud to be your Bud' Selig said MLB was now a nine Billion dollar a year industry. Any team crying "poor" is lying through their teeth. Mark http://www.hardballtimes.com/predicting-ma...-salary-growth/ http://www.foxsports.com/buzzer/story/whic...-revenue-051414 Edited January 9, 2016 by caulfield12 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.