The worst theory in the history of the OH

[Moose Milligan]

This is all meaningless Moose.

It doesn't matter what they are...it matters what PA and the Orioles organization perceive them to be.

All the more reason to field a winner.

[EL_Coyote]

Question: Does anyone know how much, if any, money PA lost in the last economic downturn? I know the Mets ownership took a bath, and of course Hicks in Texas got wiped out.

If his personal fortune took a big hit it could lead to to him being more conservative with the O's finances.

I am not calling you out on this...

Didn't the team shell out a huge bonus to Cameron Coffey? Seems to me if his bottom line was in serious trouble the team would never have done that.

Wouldn't trading Brian Roberts and Nick Markakis for prospects have been the more frugal move to make?

Millwood, Gonzales and Atkins weren't blockbuster acquisitions but they could have gone a cheaper route.

I just suspect that PA and the team account are in pretty good shape in regards to the current economy.

[Frobby]

Well they have the potential to take away a bit of the market. But living in the burbs of DC, trust me, no one cares about the Nats. And Nats Stadium is just as empty on any given night as OPACY is. After that initial novelty has worn off, the Nats are bottom feeders.

Don't you think that's just a byproduct of how bad the Nats have been? The team has no history here, so you can't expect the fans to remain interested if the team is awful. If Mike Rizzo turns that team around -- and I like his chances -- there could be a big uptick in interest.

[Sports Guy]

All the more reason to field a winner.

Sure...as long as that winner doesn't cost a high payroll.

I bet PA believes the Orioles attendance is down as much do to DC as the product on the field.

[waroriole]

I mentioned this in a post not too long ago.

http://eutawstreethooligans.wordpress.com/2009/12/11/2nd-post-in-the-same-day/

For those of you whose eyes burn if you read a swear word, don't read it.

:laughlol::rofl:

[4thebirds]

The question is who over the course of the past few years was worth a mega-million dollar contract? I can name only a handful. Fact is the Orioles put in a competetive offer to the best hitting FAs (Tex and Holiday) the past two years and have made offers in the past to Vlad, etc. It's not that the Orioles are being cheap. I believe there is still a perception that the Orioles are playing w/ "confederate money" and big name FA won't come here until the team starts winning. The O's are doing it right and not spending big money on marginal players. I have no doubt that Angelos will spend and the players will come when the time is right!!!!

[LookinUp]

I can think of two business models which could apply to the O's.

The first is the model of a small business that establishes itself, makes a lot of money and ends up growing into a monster. This business model is dependent on competence, then financial security and eventually greatness.

The second model is one where the venture capitalist comes into a failing enterprise, infuses cash and a business plan and takes a bunch of the profit out once it gets off the ground. However, venture capitalists accept great financial risk.

For the first model to be successful, you must establish a foundation of success before making large risky investments. This appears to be the path the O's are taking - managed growth. Establish the foundation first. This should result in more wins, a better gate, better ad rates on MASN and a lot of money for the owner. In theory, he should then turn around and invest a lot more into sustaining and building upon the foundational success. We're hopeful that 2010 is the year for the more wins, etc., part.

For the second model to be successful, you must have a viable business plan with a great shot at success, otherwise you'll never find that investor. In this economy, it's hard to imagine any viable business plan, much less one that's built on over paying multiple free agents to turn our team into a 95 game winner as opposed to a 65 game winner. In other words, I don't think you'll find a venture capitalist who's willing to throw a huge amount of money at the team, in this economy, in this division because the likelihood of doing so in a financially viable manner seems nil.

I think AM is building an organization with the vision of a smart businessman. I totally understand why that would be frustrating for fans, but if I were PA I wouldn't want anyone else in charge. It's the first time in decades that this franchise has had a crystal clear vision from its leadership.

[Slappy]

I'm with Moose on the theory being wrong. PA has spent, I don't doubt he's willing to spend now. The guy is worth over a billion dollars from his asbestos firm ($1.2B according to Forbes). I don't think he owns the Orioles trying to pull a large profit. Most owners in pro sports are in it for the prestige, not for the profits, and nothing builds prestige like having a winning team.

[Can_of_corn]

I am not calling you out on this...

Didn't the team shell out a huge bonus to Cameron Coffey? Seems to me if his bottom line was in serious trouble the team would never have done that.

Wouldn't trading Brian Roberts and Nick Markakis for prospects have been the more frugal move to make?

Millwood, Gonzales and Atkins weren't blockbuster acquisitions but they could have gone a cheaper route.

I just suspect that PA and the team account are in pretty good shape in regards to the current economy.

It was an honest question from me Coyote so I won't take offense at your questioning my question.

On the topic of the bonus to Coffey (and others) Lots of folks, myself included think Hobgood was a signability pick and if economics played no factor then the proper pick was Matzek, who projected to cost about 3-4 million more then Hobgood (he signed for less then that)

As for the other points, I said more conservative. I was not speculating that PA was in the same type of situation that Hicks in Texas is in.

The truth is you can put a team out there on the cheap and be sure to see a profit or you can spend money and have there be a chance that the team fails and the expected attendence boost does not arrive.

Now to be clear, I am not stating that is what happened, I was just tossing the idea out there.

[mikezpen]

I think things are different than when Angelos spent all that money in the beginning. The Orioles quickly sank to mediocrity despite the money he spent and despite their league-high payroll. He spent big on Belle and the guy went down w/an injury. He spent big on Tejada and the team probably averaged over 90 losses a year while he was here. He spent good amounts on Erickson and Segui, and they did next to nothing.He spent big on Ponson and he was a massive flop.

I think he's reluctant to spend now, maybe because he doesn't want to get burned and look bad.Maybe it's not so much that he wants to make money for himself but because spending, in his mind, hasn't worked.

[Moose Milligan]

Don't you think that's just a byproduct of how bad the Nats have been? The team has no history here, so you can't expect the fans to remain interested if the team is awful. If Mike Rizzo turns that team around -- and I like his chances -- there could be a big uptick in interest.

It absolutely is a byproduct of how bad they've been.

Sure...as long as that winner doesn't cost a high payroll.

I bet PA believes the Orioles attendance is down as much do to DC as the product on the field.

I'm not convinced that he won't increase the payroll to acceptable OH standards. Just because we haven't seen it yet doesn't mean it won't happen. I'm not getting my hopes up, either...but I don't think the future is set in stone.

I agree with your last statement, but that's a scapegoat mentality. He can't be that stupid to think that the down attendance is due solely to the Nats.

The first year the Nats came to DC, the O's took a 120k hit at the gate. The following year, 2006, 500k less.

The Nats in their first year drew 2.7 million and the next year drew 2.1 in 2006. From 2005 to 2006, both franchises saw a 500k decrease in attendance.

There was an uptick for a season due to their new stadium but it promptly came crashing down this year.

It's not like there's a correlation between a decreasing O's attendance and an increasing Nats attendance. I'm sure Angelos has to be aware of these figures if he cares as much as you and I think he does about the Nats perceived effect on the Orioles.

[SammyBirdland]

I don't know that this is relevant to the conversation, but I thought it was interesting when I learned it:

Did you know that Peter Angelos and George Steinbrenner have a net worth that is almost identical? They are both right around $1.3 billion.

[El Gordo]

I don't know how much money the O's make or PA makes, but I'd be willing to bet my pretty penny (I just have one) that what the O's bring in is a pittance compared to the size of PA wallet. I doubt that he needs the O's to stay rich. I think he runs the team to stay fiscally sound, and within those parameters to win. I think his problem has been primarily his own hubrous in micro managing the team, instead of trusting good baseball people. His concern over the Expos in DC was not micro managing, and having negotiated a guaranteed value for the team and RSN, I doubt he is too worried about the Gnats anymore.

[Moose Milligan]

I don't know that this is relevant to the conversation, but I thought it was interesting when I learned it:

Did you know that Peter Angelos and George Steinbrenner have a net worth that is almost identical? They are both right around $1.3 billion.

Too bad they don't have a fanbase that's identical.

[Frobby]

Sure...as long as that winner doesn't cost a high payroll.

I bet PA believes the Orioles attendance is down as much do to DC as the product on the field.

There's no logic to that. The Nats had their highest attendance in their first season, so that would have been the year they took the most attendance away from the Orioles. Both teams' attendance has been dropping, and that's because they are losing teams.