Angelos Claims He's Not Selling

[eddie83]

5 minutes ago, Going Underground said:

I know they are doing 6:35 weekday night starts for April, May and September. Seven or eight also weekday day games mostly because of travel. I don't think the earlier starting time will make much difference in attendance. 

I think they were going to do that in 2020. Then after the delay they backed off. 
 

I guess their research shows they aren’t getting enough fans who travel farther during the week anyway. The start time is fine with me. I’m sure it’s a personal preference for everyone. If the games wind up being quicker due to rules changes maybe they go back to 7 next year. Have to see. 
 

A lot of good comments in this thread about the younger generation having different interests. That said I would be having ticket deals for college students during the week those months. Ton of college students in the city and suburbs.

[LTO's]

16 hours ago, SemperFi said:

I can't believe I am defending JA but the statements need to be heard in context.  As an Orioles fan if you watch the short QA and you don't feel better about ownership/management and the direction of the franchise in general......

What is the context that you think people are missing? 

[Going Underground]

1 hour ago, eddie83 said:

I think they were going to do that in 2020. Then after the delay they backed off. 
 

I guess their research shows they aren’t getting enough fans who travel farther during the week anyway. The start time is fine with me. I’m sure it’s a personal preference for everyone. If the games wind up being quicker due to rules changes maybe they go back to 7 next year. Have to see. 
 

A lot of good comments in this thread about the younger generation having different interests. That said I would be having ticket deals for college students during the week those months. Ton of college students in the city and suburbs.

I couldn't wait to drive. Saved up my money from my paper route to get a used Toyota Corolla. They were much smaller then they are now and no one tall could sit in the backseat. I guess with Uber and Lyft and maybe in the future self driving cars ,no need  to drive .

 

[The Washington Post] Why aren’t teenagers driving anymore? 
Why aren’t teenagers driving anymore? 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/parenting/2023/02/21/teens-not-driving/

[LookinUp]

I went through this entire thread and don't see a lot of there there. What JA said was a throwaway line.

If instead of Gibson + Frazier this org was relying on Bassitt + Westburg/Ortiz/Norby/Urias, I think there would be a much different perspective about this offseason at roughly +$5-6 million in payroll.

If instead of Gibson + Frazier we were relying on Bassitt + Eovaldi + Westburg/Ortiz/Norby/Urias, I think we'd be way hyped up for a payroll of + $23 million or whatever.

And that was doable, but not the plan, and that's the real problem with JA and this offseason.

[BrendanPlutschak]

So I have always defended the Angelos' family when fans say that they aren't willing to spend money. 

In 2016, when the Orioles were in the middle of their winning stretch, they had the 10th highest payroll in baseball. They were willing to extend contracts and pay guys like Adam Jones, Chris Davis, JJ Hardy, Darren O'Day, Ubaldo Jimenez. Now whether they were smart deals or not is a COMPLTELY different question, but they spent the money.

Having said all of that, that was all before John Angelos' had control of the reigns like he does now, so there is a small part of me that has questions over how high of a payroll he is willing to have. Time will tell. We don't need top 5, but history shows you need to be around the top 10 to win a World Series. 

[Moose Milligan]

31 minutes ago, BrendanPlutschak said:

So I have always defended the Angelos' family when fans say that they aren't willing to spend money. 

In 2016, when the Orioles were in the middle of their winning stretch, they had the 10th highest payroll in baseball. They were willing to extend contracts and pay guys like Adam Jones, Chris Davis, JJ Hardy, Darren O'Day, Ubaldo Jimenez. Now whether they were smart deals or not is a COMPLTELY different question, but they spent the money.

Having said all of that, that was all before John Angelos' had control of the reigns like he does now, so there is a small part of me that has questions over how high of a payroll he is willing to have. Time will tell. We don't need top 5, but history shows you need to be around the top 10 to win a World Series. 

I don't think anyone disagrees that they've had moments where they've spent big money.  I believe the gripe (I honestly really don't care about it tooooooo much) is that they don't do it consistently.  That they could year in, year out, afford a payroll of 120-ish million. 

I don't care if they can afford it or not. At this point I'd like them to lock up some of our younger guys that we have right now before free agency is in their sights and they get prohibitively expensive.  

In regards to the deals you mention, it's been spoken about ad nauseam about how Chris Davis was a PA move.  I believe Buck wanted to keep Jones and Hardy and pushed for their contracts but I could be wrong.  Anyway, what matters is that Elias has a better understanding of where value is for ballplayers and I don't think he's going to get too emotionally attached to anyone.

[AnythingO's]

1 hour ago, BrendanPlutschak said:

Having said all of that, that was all before John Angelos' had control of the reigns like he does now, so there is a small part of me that has questions over how high of a payroll he is willing to have. Time will tell. We don't need top 5, but history shows you need to be around the top 10 to win a World Series. 

PA was willing to spend but he was generating income from the law firm as well, JA doesn't have that income source. The payrolls in the $140-160 M range were also years they lost money (per Forbes figures). MASN isn't the cash cow it once was. Absent a significant increase in Revenue they won't have top 10 payrolls. 

[LookinUp]

3 minutes ago, AnythingO's said:

PA was willing to spend but he was generating income from the law firm as well, JA doesn't have that income source. The payrolls in the $140-160 M range were also years they lost money (per Forbes figures). MASN isn't the cash cow it once was. Absent a significant increase in Revenue they won't have top 10 payrolls. 

You have to wonder what the future of these RSNs will be. Maybe a national RSN for small market teams that give access to those games nationwide without all of the overhead associated with local RSNs?

[Frobby]

11 minutes ago, AnythingO's said:

PA was willing to spend but he was generating income from the law firm as well, JA doesn't have that income source. The payrolls in the $140-160 M range were also years they lost money (per Forbes figures). MASN isn't the cash cow it once was. Absent a significant increase in Revenue they won't have top 10 payrolls. 

It also depends how far attendance bounces back.  Last year was 1.1 mm shy of 2014.   

[BrendanPlutschak]

55 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

I don't think anyone disagrees that they've had moments where they've spent big money.  I believe the gripe (I honestly really don't care about it tooooooo much) is that they don't do it consistently.  That they could year in, year out, afford a payroll of 120-ish million. 

I don't care if they can afford it or not. At this point I'd like them to lock up some of our younger guys that we have right now before free agency is in their sights and they get prohibitively expensive.  

In regards to the deals you mention, it's been spoken about ad nauseam about how Chris Davis was a PA move.  I believe Buck wanted to keep Jones and Hardy and pushed for their contracts but I could be wrong.  Anyway, what matters is that Elias has a better understanding of where value is for ballplayers and I don't think he's going to get too emotionally attached to anyone.

Yes but the payrolls haven't been as bad as everyone has alluded to. In the late 1990's when they were AL contenders, they had the #2 payroll in 1997 and the #1 payroll in 1998.

Then in the early 2000's, that run of 15 straight seasons below .500 began. The team was just a trainwreck, and honestly weren't close to competing. And still at the early stages of that they signed former MVP Miguel Tejada to a contract. And from 2003-2006 had the #13, #20, #14, and #15 payrolls in baseball, So in years where they were averaging around 70-75 wins a year, they were still middle of the pack in payroll. They just weren't run well and were signing old guys way past their prime. 

Then as discussed above, they start competing again with Buck in 2012, and boom right back into the top 10 in payroll. Have they had times, especially over the last 5 years of this "strip it down to the bolts" rebuild where they've been at the bottom of the pack? Absolutely. But the notion that is out there that Angelos has just had a bottom 5 payroll throughout his ownership is just completely false. Again, I need to see what John is willing to do.

[Frobby]

36 minutes ago, BrendanPlutschak said:

Yes but the payrolls haven't been as bad as everyone has alluded to. In the late 1990's when they were AL contenders, they had the #2 payroll in 1997 and the #1 payroll in 1998.

Then in the early 2000's, that run of 15 straight seasons below .500 began. The team was just a trainwreck, and honestly weren't close to competing. And still at the early stages of that they signed former MVP Miguel Tejada to a contract. And from 2003-2006 had the #13, #20, #14, and #15 payrolls in baseball, So in years where they were averaging around 70-75 wins a year, they were still middle of the pack in payroll. They just weren't run well and were signing old guys way past their prime. 

Then as discussed above, they start competing again with Buck in 2012, and boom right back into the top 10 in payroll. Have they had times, especially over the last 5 years of this "strip it down to the bolts" rebuild where they've been at the bottom of the pack? Absolutely. But the notion that is out there that Angelos has just had a bottom 5 payroll throughout his ownership is just completely false. Again, I need to see what John is willing to do.

This is all accurate, but I think the O’s market position has changed considerably.   I’d break the Angelos era into three periods:

1994 - 2004: the Orioles have no competing team in Washington and are drawing 3 mm+ fans a year, which begins to drop a few years into the long losing streak and accelerates when Cal retires.  

2005 - 2011: the Nats are in DC, but the rights fees for Nats/O’s games are pre-set at very low rates so MASN is a gold mine.  

2012 - 2023: the litigation over the rights fees commences.   The issue is still in dispute, but in any event the fees will be considerably higher than in the pre-2012 era, and with customers cutting the cord, MASN becomes far less profitable.   Attendance craters as the O’s go into rebuild mode and the pandemic occurs.  

Bottom line, the O’s are in a way worse financial position today than they were in the early years of Angelo’s’ ownership.  I don’t see them ever having a top 10 payroll unless something happens that changes the team’s revenue relative to other teams.   


 

[SemperFi]

6 hours ago, LTO's said:

What is the context that you think people are missing? 

Did you watch the video?  Not busting balls, just curious as I don't think many have. 

I'm not going to re-watch it but as someone who has been very critical of the Angelos family and JA in particular (check my posts), I feel that statements here and in the media were not a fair representative of what I thought was a quite positive QA. 

The quotes and parses from twitter (which will be the death of us all)  did not allow for the full context of his statements.  Payroll is a good example-he stated it could be 2-3X what it is now, I think most of us would be happy with a $150-$190m payroll.  The lease, hands off approach to management, the tiering (yes, we are a mid market team at best), the "good luck"covid statement (again you need to lsiten to the full statement not the parse), the follow up on the books (never thought I would see that), predicting payroll (again context, he doesn't do that but he is a part of the process).  I am sure there are others but those come to mind.

 

[AnythingO's]

Thank you Frobby for that summary. In addition, JA doesn't have the income from the law firm that PA had, absent the firm's partner, they are down 50% in size and the residuals from the big lawsuit wins are diminishing. JA doesn't have the resources PA had. Absent a big revenue increase from somewhere they are probably limited to about salaries in the $125-130 M range with zero profit. I'm sure JA gets some MASN profit, maybe he is OK with that

[Frobby]

2 minutes ago, AnythingO's said:

Thank you Frobby for that summary. In addition, JA doesn't have the income from the law firm that PA had, absent the firm's partner, they are down 50% in size and the residuals from the big lawsuit wins are diminishing. JA doesn't have the resources PA had. Absent a big revenue increase from somewhere they are probably limited to about salaries in the $125-130 M range with zero profit. I'm sure JA gets some MASN profit, maybe he is OK with that

Well, I am not ready to say what payroll they can afford.   Per Forbes, they had $ 83 mm in operating income in 2021.  We will get the Forbes 2022 numbers in a few weeks, but we know that the O’s had about 500,000 more in attendance than In 2021, and that a couple of renewed national TV deals kicked in that should lead to increased TV revenues for every team. So, I will not be at all surprised if the O’s operating income for 2022 exceeded that from 2021 by a significant margin.  But I’ll wait to see what Forbes says.  (And yes, we all know that the Forbes numbers don’t give a complete picture, but they do give an idea of where teams stand against each other and how things change year to year.)

[Can_of_corn]

I'm sure that 30M payment from Disney is going straight to payroll.