Is this rock bottom?

[NashLumber]

27 minutes ago, OFFNY said:

o

 

That's probably the best (and mentally healthiest) route to take. It reminds me of the outstanding poem by Rudyard Kipling (If.)

 

 

 

o

Well done. Thank you, man.

[spiritof66]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

From what I have heard the owner loaned money to the team and that was the source of the debt.  It is hard for me to get excited by debt when it looks like an accounting trick. 

I see Angelos going, well I'll take 20M in profits from MASN and loan it to the team.

IMO, the Orioles face four very significant economic challenges. Servicing debt is not one of them. Here they are:

• Reduced season ticket sales. Season tickets -- advance sales, in effect -- provide a valuable buffer against factors that may crop up during the season, like bad weather or disappointing performance. As an added bonus, companies and professional service firms tend to renew their season tickets even if the team has a few bad seasons, since their season tickets reflect decisions to invest in client entertainment more than in personal preferences. While I've seen no facts, let alone data, I am sure that a number of corporations, service firms and individuals based in or near Washington who had season tickets have switched to Nats season tickets. I doubt there's a way to bring them back in large numbers.
• Ticket revenues. Attendance is a key economic factor, but only insofar as it brings in revenues. The Orioles revenue per ticket sold is toward the lower end of MLB. Revenue per ticket sold roughly follows (a) per capita income in a team's area, and (b) the concentration of large companies and professional service firms in the area, whose purchases tend to drive up the top of the price scale. I've posted some of those numbers in the past, and will update them for 2017 at some point. Again, there's probably nothing the Orioles can do about this.
• The MASN decision. The arbitration decision on MASN rights fees, if it is restored by the New York Court of Appeals or is followed in a second arbitration, will reduce significantly the Orioles' take from cable TV (which is the sum of MASN profits that the Orioles retain and rights fees paid to the Orioles). 
• Estate taxes. Upon Peter Angelos' death, his estate will owe the United States and Maryland hundreds of millions of dollars. If he leaves the team to his sons, whose own financial resources outside of what they inherit are likely to be small relative to the costs of running a MLB team, are likely to have little capital left over to fund investment by the team in, for example, building up scouting and player development in Latin America. The ultimate consequence -- a sale of the team or of an interest in it -- may be a good thing, but whether or when that might occur is impossible to predict.

[NashLumber]

54 minutes ago, spiritof66 said:

IMO, the Orioles face four very significant economic challenges. Servicing debt is not one of them. Here they are:

• Reduced season ticket sales. Season tickets -- advance sales, in effect -- provide a valuable buffer against factors that may crop up during the season, like bad weather or disappointing performance. As an added bonus, companies and professional service firms tend to renew their season tickets even if the team has a few bad seasons, since their season tickets reflect decisions to invest in client entertainment more than in personal preferences. While I've seen no facts, let alone data, I am sure that a number of corporations, service firms and individuals based in or near Washington who had season tickets have switched to Nats season tickets. I doubt there's a way to bring them back in large numbers.
• Ticket revenues. Attendance is a key economic factor, but only insofar as it brings in revenues. The Orioles revenue per ticket sold is toward the lower end of MLB. Revenue per ticket sold roughly follows (a) per capita income in a team's area, and (b) the concentration of large companies and professional service firms in the area, whose purchases tend to drive up the top of the price scale. I've posted some of those numbers in the past, and will update them for 2017 at some point. Again, there's probably nothing the Orioles can do about this.
• The MASN decision. The arbitration decision on MASN rights fees, if it is restored by the New York Court of Appeals or is followed in a second arbitration, will reduce significantly the Orioles' take from cable TV (which is the sum of MASN profits that the Orioles retain and rights fees paid to the Orioles). 
• Estate taxes. Upon Peter Angelos' death, his estate will owe the United States and Maryland hundreds of millions of dollars. If he leaves the team to his sons, whose own financial resources outside of what they inherit are likely to be small relative to the costs of running a MLB team, are likely to have little capital left over to fund investment by the team in, for example, building up scouting and player development in Latin America. The ultimate consequence -- a sale of the team or of an interest in it -- may be a good thing, but whether or when that might occur is impossible to predict.

I’ve read some of your past posts on this (the team being sold) with interest and these seem like a reasonably solid set of circumstances (possibly even actual facts) surrounding the team. With others’ posts about sons John and Lou taking a more active role in the baseball decisions, it makes me wonder if every bit of what you present is a perfect storm that will lead to a sale of the team? Seems that waiting to face this until Angelos dies would be a lot messier for all concerned. Maybe Angelos’  backing away from baseball decisions points that his focus is elsewhere, preparing for a sale. Thoughts? 

[tntoriole]

46 minutes ago, NashLumber said:

I’ve read some of your past posts on this (the team being sold) with interest and these seem like a reasonably solid set of circumstances (possibly even actual facts) surrounding the team. With others’ posts about sons John and Lou taking a more active role in the baseball decisions, it makes me wonder if every bit of what you present is a perfect storm that will lead to a sale of the team? Seems that waiting to face this until Angelos dies would be a lot messier for all concerned. Maybe Angelos’  backing away from baseball decisions points that his focus is elsewhere, preparing for a sale. Thoughts? 

The team certainly could be sold.  Although the "backing away from baseball decisions" could be because when I am 89 I may have other more existential concerns needing my focus rather than running this doggone baseball team.   And while I agree that there will certainly be estate issues as noted, it is still hard for me to just believe that Peter and his sons are not more aware of those than anybody on this board and have not made suitable plans for whatever they plan to do with the team.    Peter is not a good baseball owner, but he is, by all accounts, a knowledgeable attorney presumably who is aware of estate planning.  Unless he is just planning on really messing up his kids by leaving them a minefield of unresolved debt...I don't think that is his intention, but I really don't know him or his relationship with his sons. 

The other issues of attendance, ticket revenues have been issues ever since the team arrived in Baltimore in 1954 and they are issues with most franchises when they are losing and much less when they are winning.   MASN yes could be less profitable for the Angelos family, but it is still a source of revenue that did not exist for previous owners of the team.  And the asset that Angelos acquired for less than 173 million is now valued conservatively at somewhere from 800 million to 1 billion dollars...so there is that.  

This thread OP also talked about signing Manny which I think is not going to happen.  Mistake or not, it is not going to happen.  I agree that he very well may not be traded and that Adam Jones may be extended, but I do  not see Zach being re-signed.  I think Zach if he is pitching like Zach can pitch  is more likely to be traded at the deadline than even Manny. 

[NashLumber]

6 minutes ago, tntoriole said:

The team certainly could be sold.  Although the "backing away from baseball decisions" could be because when I am 89 I may have other more existential concerns needing my focus rather than running this doggone baseball team.   And while I agree that there will certainly be estate issues as noted, it is still hard for me to just believe that Peter and his sons are not more aware of those than anybody on this board and have not made suitable plans for whatever they plan to do with the team.    Peter is not a good baseball owner, but he is, by all accounts, a knowledgeable attorney presumably who is aware of estate planning.  Unless he is just planning on really messing up his kids by leaving them a minefield of unresolved debt...I don't think that is his intention, but I really don't know him or his relationship with his sons. 

The other issues of attendance, ticket revenues have been issues ever since the team arrived in Baltimore in 1954 and they are issues with most franchises when they are losing and much less when they are winning.   MASN yes could be less profitable for the Angelos family, but it is still a source of revenue that did not exist for previous owners of the team.  And the asset that Angelos acquired for less than 173 million is now valued conservatively at somewhere from 800 million to 1 billion dollars...so there is that.  

This thread OP also talked about signing Manny which I think is not going to happen.  Mistake or not, it is not going to happen.  I agree that he very well may not be traded and that Adam Jones may be extended, but I do  not see Zach being re-signed.  I think Zach if he is pitching like Zach can pitch  is more likely to be traded at the deadline than even Manny. 

Agreed on his age. I’m surprised he stayed as involved as he has. 

[spiritof66]

1 hour ago, NashLumber said:

I’ve read some of your past posts on this (the team being sold) with interest and these seem like a reasonably solid set of circumstances (possibly even actual facts) surrounding the team. With others’ posts about sons John and Lou taking a more active role in the baseball decisions, it makes me wonder if every bit of what you present is a perfect storm that will lead to a sale of the team? Seems that waiting to face this until Angelos dies would be a lot messier for all concerned. Maybe Angelos’  backing away from baseball decisions points that his focus is elsewhere, preparing for a sale. Thoughts? 

I feel certain there's no way Angelos would ever sell the team if he thought there was any chance it would get to the postseason. (I believe his desire to get back to the post-season by preserving key elements of the 2012-16 team led to many of the poor decisions that have hurt the team and its future.)

I don't know whether Angelos is capable (or whether his sons are capable, if they're the ones doing the strategic thinking for him) of seeing what the rest of the world sees -- that the window of opportunity has closed on this group. And I don't know whether, if he/they do allow themselves to conclude that it's just not gonna happen for the Orioles while Peter's around, he would sell his interest in the team. The logic of the situation is cause for some hope. What role will logic play? I don't know that, either.

[tntoriole]

13 minutes ago, spiritof66 said:

I feel certain there's no way Angelos would ever sell the team if he thought there was any chance it would get to the postseason. (I believe his desire to get back to the post-season by preserving key elements of the 2012-16 team led to many of the poor decisions that have hurt the team and its future.)

I don't know whether Angelos is capable (or whether his sons are capable, if they're the ones doing the strategic thinking for him) of seeing what the rest of the world sees -- that the window of opportunity has closed on this group. And I don't know whether, if he/they do allow themselves to conclude that it's just not gonna happen for the Orioles while Peter's around, he would sell his interest in the team. The logic of the situation is cause for some hope. What role will logic play? I don't know that, either.

If it is at all similar to many family inheritance situations, logic will have little to do with it.   A key variable I suppose is whether John and Lou really are fired up about wanting to own the team or whether they would rather not. 

[drjohnnyfeva]

If we're not there yet, we're close.  But there's always the chance they'll pick up some shovels and keep diggin'.  Ugh.

 

The one run loses on well pitched games are just demoralizing to me.  It must be to them too.  I don't think they could have imagined they'd be this bad thru nearly 4 weeks.

[Natty]

How did this thread turn into an Angelos family discussion? WTF. 

Once upon a time...This very rich Lawyer  took ownership of the team. He said..."I will do whatever it takes to bring the Orioles to the top". 

It takes mostly one thing to bring a baseball team to the top. Money.

What a lie that was.  Lawyers lie. 

[Can_of_corn]

10 minutes ago, Natty said:

How did this thread turn into an Angelos family discussion? WTF. 

Once upon a time...This very rich Lawyer  took ownership of the team. He said..."I will do whatever it takes to bring the Orioles to the top". 

It takes mostly one thing to bring a baseball team to the top. Money.

What a lie that was.  Lawyers lie. 

[Ohfan67]

24 minutes ago, Natty said:

How did this thread turn into an Angelos family discussion? WTF. 

Once upon a time...This very rich Lawyer  took ownership of the team. He said..."I will do whatever it takes to bring the Orioles to the top". 

It takes mostly one thing to bring a baseball team to the top. Money.

What a lie that was.  Lawyers lie. 

Huge payroll for several years. Didn’t work out. Moved on to plan b. 

[Natty]

3 minutes ago, Ohfan67 said:

Huge payroll for several years. Didn’t work out. Moved on to plan b. 

Could an extra 90+ Million on this year's payroll make a difference? 

Ask The Red Sox?

[spiritof66]

59 minutes ago, Natty said:

How did this thread turn into an Angelos family discussion? WTF.

.  .  .

The path that the thread took was a little more indirect, but the future of the Angeloses' ownership of the team is (IMO) critical to an assessment of whether things will get worse before they get better. If anyone disagrees with that, I'm mildly surprised.

[Natty]

28 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

The Yankees and Blue Jays are in the same neighborhood, payroll wise as we are.    Sure, another 90M would help.   160M is enough to put a solid team on the field.  37M a year wasted on Davis and Trumbo.    That is very wasteful!!!!!

 

28 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

The Yankees and Blue Jays are in the same neighborhood, payroll wise as we are.    Sure, another 90M would help.   160M is enough to put a solid team on the field.  37M a year wasted on Davis and Trumbo.    That is very wasteful!!!!!

Yes indeed it was very wasteful signing Davis and Trumbo to those contracts. They never played that good again. Surprise, right? 

I would  trade them for sunflower seeds and pine tar. 

And with the 90 million... I would sign 3 Cy Young type pitchers. 30M per year would real them in. 

But that's just me. I want to win. 

[OFFNY]

On 4/24/2018 at 6:50 PM, RZNJ said:

 

The Yankees and the Blue Jays are in the same neighborhood, payroll-wise, as we are. Sure, another $90M would help. $160M is enough to put a solid team on the field. $37M a year wasted on Davis and Trumbo. That is very wasteful !!!!!

 

o

 

The Orioles are not in the same neighborhood as are the Yankees in terms of payroll. If they were, nobody would be fretting losing Manny Machado to free agency with only a draft pick coming back in return. The Yankees don't have those types of anxieties.

 

Yes, $160 Million is plenty enough to put a good team on the field, and the Davis contract has turned out to be very wasteful, but that contract is now a major headache for the Orioles ........ that would not be the case if he were with the Yankees.

 

Now with the Blue Jays, I can see an argument being made for them being in a similar financial boat as are the Orioles ....... but not the Yankees.

 

The major difference between the Yankees and the Orioles in terms of payroll is that with the Yankees there /has been no "risk/reward" factor in terms of paying their players to stay and/or acquiring new and expensive free agents. For mid-market and small-market teams, if they splurge on a couple of highly expensive free agents that don't work out (like the Orioles did with Chris Davis), those teams will likely be moderately to severely hamstrung financially as a result of those signings for several years. The Orioles, in light of Chris Davis' most recent contract extension and the unresolved situation with Manny Machado (and now Jonathan Schoop, also) and his/their potential mega-contract(s), could be starting down the barrel of that type of situation over the next few years. For the Yankees, it doesn't matter if they spend a lot of money on free agents that either bust and/or don't live up to the expectations that they had of them when they gave them all of that money (Carl Pavano, A. J. Burnett, Randy Johnson, Alex Rodriguez, Mark Teixeira, etc.) Or for that matter, Derek Jeter in the last few years of his career. Jeter wasn't a free agent signing, but he was a player that was making boatloads of money at that time ($16 Million a year over the final 5 years of his career between 2010 and 2014), and he was nowhere near that type of money player in his last 2 years with the team. But for the Yankees and their short-term and long-term budgets, no matter ....... they can keep spending, with little or no repercussions. There is the luxury tax situation for teams that spend excessively, but I'm talking about repercussions that seriously/adversely affect their thinking and their general financial situation in any meaningful way. Sure, the Yankees would like to avoid the luxury tax when they can, but if they don't, it's not like it then will significantly change their overall situation at-large. They almost certainly would not be remotely considering the possibility of letting a player like Manny Machado leave via free agency (if he were on their team) with only a draft pick coming back their way. Their payroll has dropped some over the last 2-3 seasons, but that has been due largely to big contracts coming off the the books, not necessarily a conscious effort by the Yankees to considerably tighten their pocket strings.

 

o