The 2020 Cleveland Indians

[jup]

The only way is at the benefit of the smaller teams to the detriment of the larger teams. There seems to be more small or medium market teams than large market. What percentage of owners would need to agree to pass a cap and rev sharring? 51% 66.7%?

Well we just might find out today

Amid coronavirus pandemic, MLB owners will vote on historic revenue-sharing plan

Major League Baseball owners are set to vote on an historic revenue-sharing agreement that could help bring baseball back by early July.

www.usatoday.com

 

[Huber.]

Well we just might find out today

Amid coronavirus pandemic, MLB owners will vote on historic revenue-sharing plan

Major League Baseball owners are set to vote on an historic revenue-sharing agreement that could help bring baseball back by early July.

www.usatoday.com

I don't expect this to get settled anytime soon.

 

[MadThinker88]

TBH I was truly confident there would be some baseball this summer until late last week. I can't put a finger on why that changed or what caused it to change. I just know now that it did change around that timeframe.
My optimism has dropped more & more each day. These latest reports are making me dread what is going to happen tomorrow (when the sides meet).

I have personally been at the negotiating table to hammer out a contract with a unionized workforce. Some of those talks have been easy. Others have been very difficult. But I always believed the 2 sides would get something worked out. I always had the sense that the groups (mgmt & worker) wanted to keep things moving forward/ keep the doors of the business open.

Now as a fan I see these 2 sides (owners & MLBPA) & I do not get that sense of a common goal to have games this year. Both sides are acting like its their way or nothing at all. What was the line in the movie Draft Day.... We live in a different world than this morning (or 30 seconds ago)... Well someone better get the leadership of both sides & knock the heads together. We are in a different world then the one of February 2020/ March 2020/ even April 2020. If there are not games this summer there will not be a winner from this. Only losers on all sides.

Both sides need to give in & give up some 'sacred cows'.
Both sides need to adapt.

Otherwise the golden goose will be cooked and everyone will lose.

 

[6.19.2016]

TBH I was truly confident there would be some baseball this summer until late last week. I can't put a finger on why that changed or what caused it to change. I just know now that it did change around that timeframe.
My optimism has dropped more & more each day. These latest reports are making me dread what is going to happen tomorrow (when the sides meet).

I have personally been at the negotiating table to hammer out a contract with a unionized workforce. Some of those talks have been easy. Others have been very difficult. But I always believed the 2 sides would get something worked out. I always had the sense that the groups (mgmt & worker) wanted to keep things moving forward/ keep the doors of the business open.

Now as a fan I see these 2 sides (owners & MLBPA) & I do not get that sense of a common goal to have games this year. Both sides are acting like its their way or nothing at all. What was the line in the movie Draft Day.... We live in a different world than this morning (or 30 seconds ago)... Well someone better get the leadership of both sides & knock the heads together. We are in a different world then the one of February 2020/ March 2020/ even April 2020. If there are not games this summer there will not be a winner from this. Only losers on all sides.

Both sides need to give in & give up some 'sacred cows'.
Both sides need to adapt.

Otherwise the golden goose will be cooked and everyone will lose.

I think they will figure it out, but I think just as big a factor is that the "test case" KBO might be facing issues, if any player was out and about in Seoul lately:

The Latest: South Korean province shutting down bars again - 9 & 10 News

The Latest on the coronavirus pandemic. The new coronavirus causes mild or moderate symptoms for most people. For some, especially older adults and people with existing health problems, it can cause more severe illness or death. TOP OF THE HOUR: — South Korean province faces two-week shutdown...

www.9and10news.com

 

[Wham with the Right Hand]

The players want to be paid for 82 games despite no revenue from ticket sales, parking, merchandise sales or concessions. That would reportedly result in the owners losing more money than if they didn't play the season at all. The players are going to have to give in and agree to the 50/50 revenue split or there will be no season and they won't get anything.

 

[Derek]

Owners already wisely conceded on service time. Money is going to be where the players have to make concessions.

 

[macbdog]

What I don't get is why aren't the players liking this? Especially if they think the owners have more money to spend than they do in places like Cleveland? Is it the % they don't like? What is reported as revenue? I get why they don't fully trust ownership, but i fully see where ownership is going with this.

 

[ncinthenext3]

There's that 50/50 revenue sharing piece. Since owners have never at any time divulged a revenue figure, players aren't going to believe them. Plus, that could set a precedent for next season, when there is no CBA. Players say that's a defacto salary cap. They're not going for that. (even though a cap might be great for the hometown club) There will be some things to work out but they better get this fixed soon. Arguing about money right now isn't going to be a good optic for whomever is doing the public bitching.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

If this season, despite being an abomination, is cancelled because the 2 sides can't agree on compensation, I hope it becomes Armageddon.

There are plenty of reasons this season will be a struggle. Safety being the most obvious. But if it gets cancelled over money? We talkin money? Then the hell with all of them. Hell, they should donate half their money to vaccine research.
Baseball got it's antitrust exemption in 1922, preventing competition. It was a different world 100 years ago. It might be time for some fresh ideas. A fresh start for an old game.

 

[ncinthenext3]

I know I've been dying for some Tribe baseball. However, if these guys, owners and MLBPA alike start bickering about the cash they're just going to tick me off, too. I mean I get that no one plays for free or expects to operate losing huge cash, but there has to be a happy medium and they better find it quick.

 

[jup]

Well I see something finally inspired discussion.

There are a couple points that are not commonly looked at.

First the owners do have a revenue stream currently => TV rights. No networks have tried to claw back anything (as of this date). So to say the owners are making nothing right now ..... And will that revenue stream be part of what they are offering, or is it strictly gate/concessions/parking. Because it is easy from the owners side to say they are hurting if you limit the revenue streams you include.

Second is post season TV revenue => and that is where the big bucks are, and what the owners want. That is why they aren't keen about fan-less games during the regular season, but are all for some kind of post season. HOWEVER, since players contracts end the last day of the season, and post season revenues for players $$$'s are calculated differently, the owners will get the big prize (postseason TV) which the players will see none of.

Usually networks don't claw back if the ongoing contract is for years, because a good working relationship is important out into the future. Remains to be seen what happens here. But a lot of times they work out a deal for some additional revenue out into the future rather than try and claw back => like additional playoff games where the dollar revenue for the networks skyrockets. So don't be blinded by the additional teams in the playoff format they are proposing. Extra playoffs to deal with claw backs ???? But the point is, the players don't get any share of this.

The financial estimates I have been told for the ideal number of games for ownership is 60. Because that is where the losses associated with putting on fan-less games while having to pay game costs but with post season revenues meet. Because without any regular season, no post season and that is where the bigger bucks are. So limit the regular season but still get the postseason is what I am told the strategy is.

There will be baseball this year

 

[ncinthenext3]

Well I see something finally inspired discussion.

There are a couple points that are not commonly looked at.

First the owners do have a revenue stream currently => TV rights. No networks have tried to claw back anything (as of this date). So to say the owners are making nothing right now ..... And will that revenue stream be part of what they are offering, or is it strictly gate/concessions/parking. Because it is easy from the owners side to say they are hurting if you limit the revenue streams you include.

Second is post season TV revenue => and that is where the big bucks are, and what the owners want. That is why they aren't keen about fan-less games during the regular season, but are all for some kind of post season. HOWEVER, since players contracts end the last day of the season, and post season revenues for players $$$'s are calculated differently, the owners will get the big prize (postseason TV) which the players will see none of.

Usually networks don't claw back if the ongoing contract is for years, because a good working relationship is important out into the future. Remains to be seen what happens here. But a lot of times they work out a deal for some additional revenue out into the future rather than try and claw back => like additional playoff games where the dollar revenue for the networks skyrockets. So don't be blinded by the additional teams in the playoff format they are proposing. Extra playoffs to deal with claw backs ???? But the point is, the players don't get any share of this.

The financial estimates I have been told for the ideal number of games for ownership is 60. Because that is where the losses associated with putting on fan-less games while having to pay game costs but with post season revenues meet. Because without any regular season, no post season and that is where the bigger bucks are. So limit the regular season but still get the postseason is what I am told the strategy is.

There will be baseball this year

Hell of a read right there. Thanks for posting that.

 

[Urban]

Well I see something finally inspired discussion.

There are a couple points that are not commonly looked at.

First the owners do have a revenue stream currently => TV rights. No networks have tried to claw back anything (as of this date). So to say the owners are making nothing right now ..... And will that revenue stream be part of what they are offering, or is it strictly gate/concessions/parking. Because it is easy from the owners side to say they are hurting if you limit the revenue streams you include.

Second is post season TV revenue => and that is where the big bucks are, and what the owners want. That is why they aren't keen about fan-less games during the regular season, but are all for some kind of post season. HOWEVER, since players contracts end the last day of the season, and post season revenues for players $$$'s are calculated differently, the owners will get the big prize (postseason TV) which the players will see none of.

Usually networks don't claw back if the ongoing contract is for years, because a good working relationship is important out into the future. Remains to be seen what happens here. But a lot of times they work out a deal for some additional revenue out into the future rather than try and claw back => like additional playoff games where the dollar revenue for the networks skyrockets. So don't be blinded by the additional teams in the playoff format they are proposing. Extra playoffs to deal with claw backs ???? But the point is, the players don't get any share of this.

The financial estimates I have been told for the ideal number of games for ownership is 60. Because that is where the losses associated with putting on fan-less games while having to pay game costs but with post season revenues meet. Because without any regular season, no post season and that is where the bigger bucks are. So limit the regular season but still get the postseason is what I am told the strategy is.

There will be baseball this year

Is post season TV revenue shared among teams?

 

[jup]

This Fangraphs thing will probably answer a lot of questions. And there is some other stuff out there also

MLB Isn’t Losing TV Revenues Yet

MLB is bound to lose revenue in 2020, but that television money might still be there.

blogs.fangraphs.com

But this is the gist of it - National TV revenue goes into a big pot and gets shared by the teams. But the Networks air few regular season games national. Fox has one on Saturday, and TBS has one, and I believe and ESPN does Sun night baseball. So limited exposure nationally during the regular season. But the big bucks for the TV rights are for postseason. The rest of the regional broadcast rights are by individual teams and there local broadcaster.

Now when these networks buy the rights, that money is spread over the length of the contract and that is the revenue stream that the owners clearly have even if the contract was negotiated several years back. Regular season games are kind of a wash as far as income generation and are looked at as subscriber builders for their cable deals with distributors, so claw backs for the regular season is not very realistic. But post season is where the bucks you see for the TV deals are based upon and where owners do have claw back exposure.

In the post season players are only paid by the revenues AT THE GATE. The whole post season pot for players is determined by ticket sales - not concessions or merchandize or parking (which all goes directly to the teams that are actually playing) or TV. So players get a portion of the gate only. So the teams have NO POST SEASON player payroll costs. But 15% of that gate goes to the commissioners office. And that 15% pays expenses for the post season production and offsets teams cost for paying the commissioner and staff. So it reduces any costs the teams incur => in essence it is distributed to all the teams through a back door. And all the TV revenues for post season go to the league office directly and are part of the distribution to the teams.

So all teams have two income streams during the post season => % of the gate and post season TV. And none of them have a single cost for players salaries. In addition, the teams playing in the post season get an additional % of the actual gate, plus concessions, parking, and merch.

That is why the post season is of so much interest to all the teams. NO PLAYER COSTS and big revenue streams. And that is what will drive the owners to have enough regular season games to get a post season, because they do not want the networks trying to claw back the missing post season game money that their bids for the rights are really based on.

And that is where the 60 game sweet spot comes from. Any losses incurred by fan-less games in the regular season get more than made up for by having a post season and fulfilling on the contracts with the networks that bought the rights to those games. Additionally, adding another layer of post season play gives MLB something they can give FOX and ESPN to make up for the loss of regular season broadcasts and not face claw backs. But the players share IN NONE OF THAT MONEY. And when you sit on the players side, and start talking about revenue sharing, but you have no part in these TV deals, it changes the way these offers made by the owners really look.

 

[Hurl Bruce]

Guess who this is: