Are we witnessing the death of the Orioles?

[Frobby]

10 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

That is where the accounting chicanery comes into play.  They still paying debt service on the money Angelos loaned the team?

 

1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I'd like to know how much of those "other expenses" were things like depreciation and other legal-but-not-real things that businesses do to limit their tax exposure.  And how much money MASN provided to the very same owners of the Orioles that isn't reflected on the Orioles' books.  The idea that the Orioles lost $6.5M, meaning Angelos and team had to write checks out of their own accounts to keep the team solvent, seems preposterous.

What legitimate other expenses could they have that add up to about $100M dollars?   

I don’t know the answers to those questions.    In 2010, Deadspin got their hands on the financial statements of five teams and published them.    That data is no longer available, but there was a thread here discussing it.    From going back to that, I was able to glean that those teams spent $15-25 mm on scouting and player development as of that time.    So, there’s one component.    
 

Anyway, I wasn’t trying to argue that the O’s are not profitable.    I just thought you’d underrepresented the expenses that the team has.     But I agree that some of the expense listed by Forbes may be non-cash bookkeeping items or debt service due to the owners.    I really don’t know.   

[Larry18]

1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

How many people do you know who aren't from DC who used to be real O's fans who have abandoned the team for the Nats?  The only ones I know are old guys who grew up around DC and used to root for the Senators.

This is my experience as well. I lived in DC for 47 years and the main reasons I had for not attending Orioles games were dissatisfaction with ownership and traffic. Originally in that order but the past 10 years traffic became a major obstacle. 
 

I live on the eastern shore now and love the direction of the team and will start attending games once again. Some of us really enjoy the rebuild process.

[Going Underground]

2 hours ago, Frobby said:

 

I don’t know the answers to those questions.    In 2010, Deadspin got their hands on the financial statements of five teams and published them.    That data is no longer available, but there was a thread here discussing it.    From going back to that, I was able to glean that those teams spent $15-25 mm on scouting and player development as of that time.    So, there’s one component.    
 

Anyway, I wasn’t trying to argue that the O’s are not profitable.    I just thought you’d underrepresented the expenses that the team has.     But I agree that some of the expense listed by Forbes may be non-cash bookkeeping items or debt service due to the owners.    I really don’t know.   

Is the money spent on signing draft picks in the player expenses?

Also the MASN revenue not subject to revenue sharing is not in the Forbes calculation. MASN is a separate entity then the Orioles.That is one of the reasons the Orioles dont want to give any more  money to the Nationals. For every dollar they give more to the Nationals they have to give to the Orioles and that is subject to revenue sharing. 

[Frobby]

16 minutes ago, Going Underground said:

Is the money spent on signing draft picks in the player expenses?

Also the MASN revenue not subject to revenue sharing is not in the Forbes calculation. MASN is a separate entity then the Orioles.That is one of the reasons the Orioles dont want to give any more  money to the Nationals. For every dollar they give more to the Nationals they have to give to the Orioles and that is subject to revenue sharing. 

I’d expect that the signing bonuses from the draft and foreign amateur signings are in a different bucket.   Player costs as used by Forbes is the major league player salaries plus benefits.    

[DrungoHazewood]

3 hours ago, Redskins Rick said:

Redskins stink, and the fan still support and fill the seats, and always have, go back over the years, when they lead NFL in sold out games and yes, RFK was smaller than FEDEX but not that small.

I am not a hockey fan, but love the caps, but willingly admit, to waiting for playoffs to watch their games, and I havent been to a cap game since Cap Arena in Largo.

The Senators never had a real winning season, but in spite of that, their attendance wasnt bad, they had an idiot owner with thin pockets, who saw a golden opportunity and he jumped.

I was a big bullets fan, until I fell out of favor with the NBA and wish the Wizards well.

The expansion Senators were regularly 8th-10th in attendance in a 10 team league.  Only once did it rise as high as 6th. The original AL Senators were 8th in an 8 team league through most of the 50s, falling back in the pack after the Browns and A's moved.  Their attendance was poor.

And FedEx Field is often substantially empty for Redskins games, even after removing or covering a ton of seats.

[JR Oriole]

18 hours ago, Ohfan67 said:

St Louis really jumps out when you look at attendance numbers for MLB. They have big market attendance in an area with a modest population. Impressive. 

I think that St. Louis and the Cardinal fanbase is a lot like San Antonio and the Spurs fanbase.  Not exactly the same because the Spurs are actually the only game in town (and St. Louis has the Blues), but similar enough.  Both the Cardinals and Spurs are winning franchises that are basically never bad.  What have the Spurs had, five titles and one losing season in 30+ years?  And that one bad season got them Tim Duncan.  Over the last 20 seasons, the Cardinals have had a losing record exactly one time...in 2007 when they went 78-84.  13 playoff appearances, 4 pennants, and 2 titles over that stretch.  The team is basically always good and that makes it much easier to be a fan and to keep attendance up. 

[Redskins Rick]

2 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

The expansion Senators were regularly 8th-10th in attendance in a 10 team league.  Only once did it rise as high as 6th. The original AL Senators were 8th in an 8 team league through most of the 50s, falling back in the pack after the Browns and A's moved.  Their attendance was poor.

And FedEx Field is often substantially empty for Redskins games, even after removing or covering a ton of seats.

When they played at 56K RFK, they sold out football games, 100K seats at FED-EX was a bit of a stretch, they put a lot of fans in the stands.

In 1969, they only drew 11K average to home games, yet, there was 9 teams, that did worse.

The Original Senators moved to Minnesota and became the twins.

 

[BohKnowsBmore]

On 10/16/2019 at 7:56 AM, Todd-O said:

Not to kick this day off with doom and gloom,

Yet that's exactly what you're doing.  Your narrative seems to take anecdotes (whether they be real or not) and paint them in the most negative light, that works toward a pre-determined conclusion at the death of baseball in Baltimore.

[DrungoHazewood]

1 hour ago, Redskins Rick said:

When they played at 56K RFK, they sold out football games, 100K seats at FED-EX was a bit of a stretch, they put a lot of fans in the stands.

In 1969, they only drew 11K average to home games, yet, there was 9 teams, that did worse.

The Original Senators moved to Minnesota and became the twins.

 

The Redskins had few problems selling out FedEx when some living fans could still remember when the team had been relevant.

[Redskins Rick]

2 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

The Redskins had few problems selling out FedEx when some living fans could still remember when the team had been relevant.

NFL attendance has drop around the league, much like MLB, just not to the extent MLB is seeing.

Like most new stadiums, when they are brand new, they tend to be fuller at the beginning.

I did find it a bit funny, in 2018, the Ravens had more fans in the stand than the Skins, for home games, and the reverse for road games.

 

[DrungoHazewood]

1 minute ago, Redskins Rick said:

NFL attendance has drop around the league, much like MLB, just not to the extent MLB is seeing.

Like most new stadiums, when they are brand new, they tend to be fuller at the beginning.

I did find it a bit funny, in 2018, the Ravens had more fans in the stand than the Skins, for home games, and the reverse for road games.

 

As with the Orioles, winning matters.  The last time the Redskins were strong Super Bowl contenders I was in college.  I'm now 48.  The Redskins are the old Pirates, Royals, and Orioles, just without the 2010s surges each of those teams had.  Almost no team could go through 25 years of irrelevance without taking a significant hit in their fanbase.

[Frobby]

2 minutes ago, Redskins Rick said:

NFL attendance has drop around the league, much like MLB, just not to the extent MLB is seeing.

Like most new stadiums, when they are brand new, they tend to be fuller at the beginning.

I did find it a bit funny, in 2018, the Ravens had more fans in the stand than the Skins, for home games, and the reverse for road games.

FedEx is a far less enjoyable experience than RFK was, regardless of how good or bad the team is.    It takes forever to get there, the parking situation is abysmal, and the concession prices are extortionate.    I know several people who spent years on the waiting list, got tickets at FedEx, and gave them up after a few years because the experience just wasn’t worth it.     Of course, the team’s failures are part of it too.   

[Redskins Rick]

2 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

As with the Orioles, winning matters.  The last time the Redskins were strong Super Bowl contenders I was in college.  I'm now 48.  The Redskins are the old Pirates, Royals, and Orioles, just without the 2010s surges each of those teams had.  Almost no team could go through 25 years of irrelevance without taking a significant hit in their fanbase.

The extremely high cost of NFL almost dictates the team be relevant, if you want to put fan into the seats.

 

[Redskins Rick]

1 minute ago, Frobby said:

FedEx is a far less enjoyable experience than RFK was, regardless of how good or bad the team is.    It takes forever to get there, the parking situation is abysmal, and the concession prices are extortionate.    I know several people who spent years on the waiting list, got tickets at FedEx, and gave them up after a few years because the experience just wasn’t worth it.     Of course, the team’s failures are part of it too.   

For me, its easier to get to FEDEX. Parking is best, if you pay the extra money and get "A" ticket parking.

Concession prices, are crazy. Lucky, last couple of times, I got comped tickets which included food and drink.

[DrungoHazewood]

19 minutes ago, Frobby said:

FedEx is a far less enjoyable experience than RFK was, regardless of how good or bad the team is.    It takes forever to get there, the parking situation is abysmal, and the concession prices are extortionate.    I know several people who spent years on the waiting list, got tickets at FedEx, and gave them up after a few years because the experience just wasn’t worth it.     Of course, the team’s failures are part of it too.   

I concur on all accounts.  I've had a Virginia Tech game there that ended at midnight, and I walked in my front door at 4am (normally 1:15 away).  I've sat in seats at FedEx that felt like a quarter-mile from the field.  I once sat five seats over from a woman who vomited over most of an entire section, it was barely cleaned up and other people were allowed to come sit in the abandoned seats.  You can park in stadium lots that must be almost a mile from the stadium.  And a Miller Lite costs like $14. It's my least favorite stadium.  RFK, dilapidated and obsolete, with 11,000 soccer fans at a DC United game, was a wonderful experience.