Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Frobby

MASN: the veil finally lifts

Recommended Posts

46 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

All interesting.

I'm not sure how payment would work, but the O's apparently have a $70 million check to write. Makes sense that they'd be cutting costs right now.

That money may already be set aside in escrow?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

So if I understand this correctly, they got 70+42 = 112M or so in MASN and ticket revenues.  48% of that is $54M, they keep $58M.  So $209M in shared revenues plus 58M = $267M.  That doesn't include advertising, concessions, parking, random other stuff (I don't think Forbes counts any of that in gate receipts).  Even if those things are pretty trivial it looks like Forbes is under-counting Orioles revenues by $30M or more.  And I'm no accountant, but that $6.5M operating loss should be more like a $25M profit, right?  

And that's based mostly on 2018 numbers, before they cut payroll significantly.  But also before they lost a 264k in attendance, but attendance revenues probably only declined $7M from 2018-19 (roughly $27 per ticket).

I  think the MASN money that goes directly to the Limited Partnership is not included.Forbes is at best guessing at best unless they actually see a P&L statement and a balance sheet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

So if I understand this correctly, they got 70+42 = 112M or so in MASN and ticket revenues.  48% of that is $54M, they keep $58M.  So $209M in shared revenues plus 58M = $267M.  That doesn't include advertising, concessions, parking, random other stuff (I don't think Forbes counts any of that in gate receipts).  Even if those things are pretty trivial it looks like Forbes is under-counting Orioles revenues by $30M or more.  And I'm no accountant, but that $6.5M operating loss should be more like a $25M profit, right?  

And that's based mostly on 2018 numbers, before they cut payroll significantly.  But also before they lost a 264k in attendance, but attendance revenues probably only declined $7M from 2018-19 (roughly $27 per ticket).

Didn''t payroll go down over $65 to $70 million from 2018?Maybe a little more. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

So if I understand this correctly, they got 70+42 = 112M or so in MASN and ticket revenues.  48% of that is $54M, they keep $58M.  So $209M in shared revenues plus 58M = $267M.  That doesn't include advertising, concessions, parking, random other stuff (I don't think Forbes counts any of that in gate receipts).  Even if those things are pretty trivial it looks like Forbes is under-counting Orioles revenues by $30M or more.  And I'm no accountant, but that $6.5M operating loss should be more like a $25M profit, right?  

And that's based mostly on 2018 numbers, before they cut payroll significantly.  But also before they lost a 264k in attendance, but attendance revenues probably only declined $7M from 2018-19 (roughly $27 per ticket).

The big factor is the MASN rights fees and profits.    The MASN profits aren’t counted in Forbes’ calculations, and for the rights fees they were probably only counting the amount the O’s were actually paid in that bucket by MASN.    We don’t have numbers for 2017-19 for that, but I’d assume they’re $20-35 mm lower than the actual cash flow paid by MASN, based on past practice in 2012-16.     

Raising the rights fees makes the Forbes numbers look better but hurt the O’s in two ways:   (1) the increase in rights fees is less than the reduction of profits payable to the Orioles, and (2) 48% of the rights fee increase is paid into the revenue sharing pool, whereas none of the MASN profits are.    
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Going Underground said:

Didn''t payroll go down over $65 to $70 million from 2018?Maybe a little more. 

According to Sportrac:

2020  = 49M

2019  = 73M

2018 = 130M

2017 = 175M

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Redskins Rick said:

According to Sportrac:

2020  = 49M

2019  = 73M

2018 = 130M

2017 = 175M

 

That’s a little different from what BB-ref says, but close enough.    I don’t think the 2020 number includes our arbitration-eligible players, so that number will increase significantly.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Frobby said:

That’s a little different from what BB-ref says, but close enough.    I don’t think the 2020 number includes our arbitration-eligible players, so that number will increase significantly.   

You would think they would get the correct/same amount, but I guess the contracts get pretty complicated.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Redskins Rick said:

You would think they would get the correct/same amount, but I guess the contracts get pretty complicated.

 

I think it relates partly to whether you are looking at opening day payroll or actual payroll expenditures during the season.  Also, whether you are including deferred comp, and how you are calculating its value.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I think it relates partly to whether you are looking at opening day payroll or actual payroll expenditures during the season.  Also, whether you are including deferred comp, and how you are calculating its value.  

I like the ones that actually tell you opening day payroll, as you mentioned its a moving peg.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/4/2019 at 11:42 AM, Going Underground said:

I  think the MASN money that goes directly to the Limited Partnership is not included.Forbes is at best guessing at best unless they actually see a P&L statement and a balance sheet.

I've always assumed this. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/3/2019 at 11:44 PM, TonySoprano said:

Since these numbers were hidden it makes me wonder what did Forbes use in their valuations of profit/loss.  Along those lines, the Orioles may have been more profitable than some surmised.

You think?  MLB owners cry poor and act like they are bathed in red while they are basically printing money.  And this is why they are desperate to keep their balance sheets private.  Prying eyes don’t help get cities to pay for shiny new ballparks, nor make the MLBPA more malleable in their negotiations.  You can be sure that whatever city whose team is looking them to pony up half a billion for their new digs is going to use this information for their due diligence.  And this is precisely the sort of information Selig and Manfred didn’t want to see the light of day.  They warned and threatened sanctions for doing this.  Does Manfred have the balls to now take draft picks?

Edited by Beetlejuice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores

News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats







×
×
  • Create New...