Posted October 1, 200420 yr to lets say.. 70 million next year? That would put us about in the middle of the pack instead of the lower part of salaries.. Is there any way we can do this?
October 1, 200420 yr Not unless a stadium deal does go through and Loria decides to be REAL generous with his money. :shifty
October 1, 200420 yr no need to expand payroll that much. just get creative and backlog some of the contracts. this is if the FO is convinced that a stadium deal will happend.
October 1, 200420 yr to lets say.. 70 million next year? That would put us about in the middle of the pack instead of the lower part of salaries.. Is there any way we can do this? 577538[/snapback] if winning a world series doesn't motivate an owner to increase payroll, i don't think anything will.
October 1, 200420 yr to lets say.. 70 million next year? That would put us about in the middle of the pack instead of the lower part of salaries.. Is there any way we can do this? 577538[/snapback] How bout you put up the money?
October 1, 200420 yr no chance. they'd have to raise payroll just to keep the same lineup, & even that won't happen. just gotta find some way to minimize the losses...
October 1, 200420 yr to lets say.. 70 million next year? That would put us about in the middle of the pack instead of the lower part of salaries.. Is there any way we can do this? 577538[/snapback] if winning a world series doesn't motivate an owner to increase payroll, i don't think anything will. 577639[/snapback] Well it's also sad that his team wins the WS and still loses money :plain
October 1, 200420 yr Author to lets say.. 70 million next year? That would put us about in the middle of the pack instead of the lower part of salaries.. Is there any way we can do this? 577538[/snapback] How bout you put up the money? 577642[/snapback] Cash or check?
October 1, 200420 yr to lets say.. 70 million next year? That would put us about in the middle of the pack instead of the lower part of salaries.. Is there any way we can do this? 577538[/snapback] if winning a world series doesn't motivate an owner to increase payroll, i don't think anything will. 577639[/snapback] Well it's also sad that his team wins the WS and still loses money :plain 577662[/snapback] the concept of "losing money" is one of the most deceiving in all of sports. our owner (jeffrey loria) will inevitably sell the team for a price much higher than the price he paid. also, he already has a massive amount of public financing earmarked for a brand new baseball stadium for his franchise. for an owner of a sports team to claim that, in a given year, since his expenses exceed his revenues he is "losing money," is extremely deceitful. i don't care how you cut it, there's no excuse for not increasing payroll after winning a world series--particularly when you have a heavily publicly-funded stadium on the horizon.
October 1, 200420 yr If they got a better stadium deal giving them more of the revenues and had a guaranteed 30K a night at the ticket booth.
October 1, 200420 yr to lets say.. 70 million next year? That would put us about in the middle of the pack instead of the lower part of salaries.. Is there any way we can do this? 577538[/snapback] if winning a world series doesn't motivate an owner to increase payroll, i don't think anything will. 577639[/snapback] Well it's also sad that his team wins the WS and still loses money :plain 577662[/snapback] the concept of "losing money" is one of the most deceiving in all of sports. our owner (jeffrey loria) will inevitably sell the team for a price much higher than the price he paid. also, he already has a massive amount of public financing earmarked for a brand new baseball stadium for his franchise. for an owner of a sports team to claim that, in a given year, since his expenses exceed his revenues he is "losing money," is extremely deceitful. i don't care how you cut it, there's no excuse for not increasing payroll after winning a world series--particularly when you have a heavily publicly-funded stadium on the horizon. 577728[/snapback] Your are completely wrong here. First off that stadium deal only has part of the funds coming from the city, a good portion of it will be paid for by the team. Sorry to be the one to inform you but when you have a team that ranked 27th in the league in attendance the season after winning a world series and you have a stadium lease like the Marlins have now. It's not too hard to see that the team is loosing money. Also what makes you think that a stadium deal will automatically increase payroll? That will also not likely happen especially since now there is no way a stadium will be built before 2008. No, in fact payroll will decrease in order to make up for the money the team will put into the stadium, up until the stadium opens. At which time payroll may increase since then they may be able to see some profits from the new stadium. Historically teams have VERY low payroll's while a new stadium is being constructed.
October 1, 200420 yr to lets say.. 70 million next year? That would put us about in the middle of the pack instead of the lower part of salaries.. Is there any way we can do this? 577538[/snapback] if winning a world series doesn't motivate an owner to increase payroll, i don't think anything will. 577639[/snapback] Well it's also sad that his team wins the WS and still loses money :plain 577662[/snapback] the concept of "losing money" is one of the most deceiving in all of sports. our owner (jeffrey loria) will inevitably sell the team for a price much higher than the price he paid. also, he already has a massive amount of public financing earmarked for a brand new baseball stadium for his franchise. for an owner of a sports team to claim that, in a given year, since his expenses exceed his revenues he is "losing money," is extremely deceitful. i don't care how you cut it, there's no excuse for not increasing payroll after winning a world series--particularly when you have a heavily publicly-funded stadium on the horizon. 577728[/snapback] Your are completely wrong here. First off that stadium deal only has part of the funds coming from the city, a good portion of it will be paid for by the team. Sorry to be the one to inform you but when you have a team that ranked 27th in the league in attendance the season after winning a world series and you have a stadium lease like the Marlins have now. It's not too hard to see that the team is loosing money. Also what makes you think that a stadium deal will automatically increase payroll? That will also not likely happen especially since now there is no way a stadium will be built before 2008. No, in fact payroll will decrease in order to make up for the money the team will put into the stadium, up until the stadium opens. At which time payroll may increase since then they may be able to see some profits from the new stadium. Historically teams have VERY low payroll's while a new stadium is being constructed. 577771[/snapback] the cardinals have a fairly high payroll right now. simple fact is that attendance sucks by and by in miami. winning a world series changed it a little, but by large people still do not come out... its frustrating as hell, this team deserves to play in front of big crowds. the fans have failed consistently to back up the team on a nightly basis. a new stadium would fix that for about a year. then the same crap would happen again.
October 1, 200420 yr It wouldn't surprise me if next year Beinfest will be given the same $53M (+12M) to work with. No postseason revenue. Repairs need at the Jupiter camp. Possible monetary settlement with the Canadian minority partners. Attendance means nothing, maybe a few hundred thousand. The Marlins makes squat on parking and that hot dog you ate.
October 2, 200420 yr We might see payroll increase $4-5 million. If Pavano is willing to defer the first year, then the extra $$$ could be used to sign Benitez and LoDuca. We still will have to find a way to trim salary...with Encarnacion being the most likely candidate to trade. It would also make sense to trade Lowell to open a spot in the IF for Cabrera, plus clear salary...but who knows if this would happen, as we would only have the ability to do so if the stadium deal goes through.
October 2, 200420 yr to lets say.. 70 million next year? That would put us about in the middle of the pack instead of the lower part of salaries.. Is there any way we can do this? 577538[/snapback] if winning a world series doesn't motivate an owner to increase payroll, i don't think anything will. 577639[/snapback] Well it's also sad that his team wins the WS and still loses money :plain 577662[/snapback] the concept of "losing money" is one of the most deceiving in all of sports. our owner (jeffrey loria) will inevitably sell the team for a price much higher than the price he paid. also, he already has a massive amount of public financing earmarked for a brand new baseball stadium for his franchise. for an owner of a sports team to claim that, in a given year, since his expenses exceed his revenues he is "losing money," is extremely deceitful. i don't care how you cut it, there's no excuse for not increasing payroll after winning a world series--particularly when you have a heavily publicly-funded stadium on the horizon. 577728[/snapback] Exactly, remember when Huizenga claimed to have lost 30 million the year the Fish won it all? However in Loria's case with the ridiculous lease on PPS I wouldn't be surprised if he did lose money. Huizenga should die a very painful death...
October 2, 200420 yr $61-65 million would probably be the best case scenario. Although I doubt Loria will even pony up that much.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.