Billions

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

No because attendance is only a part of the money they make.

They make more money on TV and radio deals.  
 

The more they delay it, the more money they lose.

That’s clearly wrong.   There’s a reason they stalled as long as possible last year.    

[Roll Tide]

9 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

Zero chance of this.

And they make the majority of their money from TV revenue. If they are able to collect a full season of that money most.

 

[Sports Guy]

19 minutes ago, Frobby said:

That’s clearly wrong.   There’s a reason they stalled as long as possible last year.    

Because they are children.  Those negotiations had long term ramifications behind them.  With the new CBA coming up, it is all about each side getting their way.

Its like the stimulus plans each side is trying to do.  They don’t really care about how it helps us, they want the “pork” in it to make sure they get what they want long term.

When games aren’t on TV, you aren’t generating TV dollars, advertising dollars, etc...more money comes from that than it does from attendance.  That has always been the case.  

[Sports Guy]

https://econintersect.com/pages/analysis/analysis.php?post=201911150136

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Because they are children.  Those negotiations had long term ramifications behind them.  With the new CBA coming up, it is all about each side getting their way.

Its like the stimulus plans each side is trying to do.  They don’t really care about how it helps us, they want the “pork” in it to make sure they get what they want long term.

When games aren’t on TV, you aren’t generating TV dollars, advertising dollars, etc...more money comes from that than it does from attendance.  That has always been the case.  

That has not always been the case.  That is just a ridiculous statement.

[Sports Guy]

13 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

That has not always been the case.  That is just a ridiculous statement.

What is ridiculous about it?

[Can_of_corn]

18 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

What is ridiculous about it?

It's not true, it's not even close to true.  It's only been the case for a short part of baseball's history.

[BohKnowsBmore]

11 hours ago, Philip said:

Believers call it “an act of God,” The secular term is “force majeur” And the truth Is that every insurance policy has such a clause regardless of what you call it, And it sure looks like MLB loses.

oh well.

 

 

On 12/5/2020 at 10:13 AM, Frobby said:

Lots of complications in these cases, per the article:

At least one of those minor league cases, filed in Arizona and led by the Chattanooga Lookouts, has already been dismissed due to a virus exclusion in the policy.

Insurers in many cases have insisted that financial losses caused by the coronavirus do not constitute physical loss or property damage. MLB is claiming the virus has led to both.

“The presence of the coronavirus and COVID-19, including but not limited to coronavirus droplets or nuclei on solid surfaces and in the air at insured property, has caused and will continue to cause direct physical damage to physical property and ambient air at the premises,” the suit says. “Coronavirus, a physical substance, has attached and adhered to Plaintiffs’ property and by doing so, altered that property. Such presence has also directly resulted in loss of use of those facilities.”

===

Honestly, if that’s the best argument MLB has got, as a lawyer I’d rather have the defense side of this case.    But, it will probably take a year to shake out.   
 

Seems like the “should be covered” language in the tweet doesn’t match the article itself. Unless that’s supposed to be representing the owners’ contention. Either way, seems sloppy for a once iconic media property. 

[Sports Guy]

5 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

It's not true, it's not even close to true.  It's only been the case for a short part of baseball's history.

I will say, if anyone knows what a ridiculous argument looks like, it would be someone crying about 200k not being spent, so maybe I’m off.

That being said, I can amend my thought to recent memory as opposed to always..still doesn’t change the point.

[DrungoHazewood]

6 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

It's not true, it's not even close to true.  It's only been the case for a short part of baseball's history.

In the 1950s teams were terrified of television.  If you could sit in your Lazy Boy with a TV dinner and watch the game on a 12" black-and-white screen why would you ever come to the park?  Must keep all games off TV!

Just guessing, but it was probably the 80s before game-day revenues dropped below 80% of overall revenues.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Sports Guy said:

Interesting.  You have evidence of this?

Sure.  How much TV revenue did MLB collect in 1901? 

I doubt TV money exceeded attendance in the 50's. 

I'm slightly curious when TV money first exceeded attendance related income but I don't have the time to research it right now.

[Sports Guy]

1 minute ago, DrungoHazewood said:

In the 1950s teams were terrified of television.  If you could sit in your Lazy Boy with a TV dinner and watch the game on a 12" black-and-white screen why would you ever come to the park?  Must keep all games off TV!

Yet they were good with radio (another money producer the teams lose out on with no games btw)

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

In the 1950s teams were terrified of television.  If you could sit in your Lazy Boy with a TV dinner and watch the game on a 12" black-and-white screen why would you ever come to the park?  Must keep all games off TV!

Even growing up in the 70's wasn't much MLB on TV.

[DrungoHazewood]

3 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Even growing up in the 70's wasn't much MLB on TV.

Do you remember NFL blackouts, where if ticket sales were below some percentage of capacity the game wouldn't be on (local?) TV?  Clearly teams as late as the 70s and 80s made a lot more from ticket sales than TV.

[Can_of_corn]

8 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I will say, if anyone knows what a ridiculous argument looks like, it would be someone crying about 200k not being spent, so maybe I’m off.

That being said, I can amend my thought to recent memory as opposed to always..still doesn’t change the point.

Classy edit Sports Guy.  You stay you.