Orioles Had -$2.1 Million Operating Loss Last Season

[eddie83]

3 minutes ago, Frobby said:

The panel did take profitability into account.    The RSDC panel set rights fees at a number where, using conservative projections of MASN revenues, MASN would be left with a 5% profit margin after rights fees were paid equally to both teams.     The complaint of MASN is that they said the RSDC was required to use the so-called "Bortz methodology," which assumed a 20% profit margin, not 5%.    That's the crux of the whole dispute, but either way, MASN makes a profit, it's just a matter of how much.

It should be noted that when the arbitration took place, the revenues of MASN for 2012-16 had to be projected.     If there is a new arbitration, the revenues for that period will already be known.   So for that reason alone, the result will probably be different.   And of course, we're already a year into the new "re-set period" of 2017-21, and there has been no agreement or arbitration about what rights fees should be for that period.

Ok, thanks for explaining. So basically Angelos personally gets hurt when the teams are paid more because there is less profit for MASN itself. 

Am I correct in saying other teams use loopholes in terms of funneling more money to the networks they own instead of rights fees? For revenue sharing purposes.  

[eddie83]

5 minutes ago, pastorfan said:

9th highest payroll and still starting pitching that is that terrible? DD has managed to do something quite unusual.

And how much of that payroll is allocated to starting pitching? 

[Redskins Rick]

Just now, eddie83 said:

And how much of that payroll is allocated to starting pitching? 

0

[Frobby]

4 minutes ago, eddie83 said:

Ok, thanks for explaining. So basically Angelos personally gets hurt when the teams are paid more because there is less profit for MASN itself. 

Am I correct in saying other teams use loopholes in terms of funneling more money to the networks they own instead of rights fees? For revenue sharing purposes.  

As I understand it, the main job of the RSDC is to scrutinize the arrangements between the teams and their captive networks to make sure they are not setting rights fees artificially low and thus avoiding revenue sharing.     MASN's complaint is that the RSDC did not use the same methodology in their case as the RSDC has used in other cases.

[eddie83]

2 minutes ago, Frobby said:

As I understand it, the main job of the RSDC is to scrutinize the arrangements between the teams and their captive networks to make sure they are not setting rights fees artificially low and thus avoiding revenue sharing.     MASN's complaint is that the RSDC did not use the same methodology in their case as the RSDC has used in other cases.

In the beginning I followed the MASN thing closely but the last couple of years I started to ignore it because it was so frustrating, it keeps dragging on. 

You have probably already explained this in previous threads  but thanks again. 

I can certainly see why the Orioles are so mad. Have to wonder if this simply isn’t to try to bust MASN and get the Nats out of an unfavorable deal.  

[Frobby]

7 minutes ago, eddie83 said:

And how much of that payroll is allocated to starting pitching? 

As mentioned, the numbers from Forbes are for 2016, not 2017.    However, spending a lot of money on pitching does not always equate to having good pitching.    The O's spent a lot less on pitching in 2014 than they did in 2017, but their pitching was a lot better.   The six starters from 2014 cost a total of $22.2 mm, about half of which was Ubaldo.   The top six starters from 2017 cost about $37.5 mm.   We haven't done a good job of finding some cheap, good pitchers like Chen and Gonzalez were over the last couple of seasons.

[eddie83]

Just now, Frobby said:

As mentioned, the numbers from Forbes are for 2016, not 2017.    However, spending a lot of money on pitching does not always equate to having good pitching.    The O's spent a lot less on pitching in 2014 than they did in 2017, but their pitching was a lot better.   The six starters from 2014 cost a total of $22.2 mm, about half of which was Ubaldo.   The top six starters from 2017 cost about $37.5 mm.   We haven't done a good job of finding some cheap, good pitchers like Chen and Gonzalez were over the last couple of seasons.

Correct but I think looking at the teams payroll and saying that the pitching should be better considering how the money is spent isn’t fair.  

I also think pitchers like Chen and Gonzalez are the exceptions to the norm. 

[weams]

7 minutes ago, eddie83 said:

In the beginning I followed the MASN thing closely but the last couple of years I started to ignore it because it was so frustrating, it keeps dragging on. 

You have probably already explained this in previous threads  but thanks again. 

I can certainly see why the Orioles are so mad. Have to wonder if this simply isn’t to try to bust MASN and get the Nats out of an unfavorable deal.  

You do not have to wonder. It was obviously the intended outcome that was promised to the buyers of the franchise from the MLB. 

[wildcard]

This is not even accurate for the O's final payroll which was 170m before deferral and 157m after deferrals.   164m was the O's opening day payroll.    If they don't accurately account of the payroll how can they say  what the O's profit or loss was?

[Redskins Rick]

1 minute ago, wildcard said:

This is not even accurate for the O's final payroll which was 170m before deferral and 157m after deferrals.   164m was the O's opening day payroll.    If they don't accurately account of the payroll how can they say  what the O's profit or loss was?

did you not read Frobby's explanation that this is from April and represents the season before data?

[weams]

6 minutes ago, wildcard said:

This is not even accurate for the O's final payroll which was 170m before deferral and 157m after deferrals.   164m was the O's opening day payroll.    If they don't accurately account of the payroll how can they say  what the O's profit or loss was?

Wrong season. Anyway, I always have doubts on the reality of all of these reports. But it is newsworthy to discuss. 

[Redskins Rick]

Just now, weams said:

Wrong season. Anyway, I always have doubts on the reality of all of these reports. But it is newsworthy to discuss. 

Accounting tricks to show a loss to reduce tax liabilities.

[Frobby]

14 minutes ago, wildcard said:

This is not even accurate for the O's final payroll which was 170m before deferral and 157m after deferrals.   164m was the O's opening day payroll.    If they don't accurately account of the payroll how can they say  what the O's profit or loss was?

 

6 minutes ago, weams said:

Wrong season. Anyway, I always have doubts on the reality of all of these reports. But it is newsworthy to discuss. 

I also think Forbes uses a different methodology for calculating payroll that grosses up the number to include the cost of benefits.    That's from memory, so I could be wrong about that.

[wildcard]

20 minutes ago, Redskins Rick said:

did you not read Frobby's explanation that this is from April and represents the season before data?

I don't agree with Frobby.   164m is the opening day 2017 payroll as reported by Cots Contracts and I agree with that number.  It does not include deferrals. Here s the link.

http://legacy.baseballprospectus.com/compensation/cots/al-east/baltimore-orioles/

The 2016 opening day payroll was 147m before deferrals.  The ending 2016 payroll was 152m before deferrals and 139m after deferrals.

I follow this very closely during the season and I will be glad to post both 2016 and 2017 payrolls if anyone wants to see them.

 

[Going Underground]

19 minutes ago, Redskins Rick said:

Accounting tricks to show a loss to reduce tax liabilities.

Orioles are not a public company so this is all guesswork and estimates. You can show a loss one quarter and accrue something into another quarter or even into another year. You can deprecate property in all different manners. Public companies use loopholes in the tax laws on their financial statement. A  private company without seeing their books is a guess at best.