"Revenue Sharing

Unlike the NFL, baseball might not share all of its revenue. But the 300 million bucks a year it does share now are having a major effect.

 

Anybody think the Marlins would be a prospective NL East favorite without the $27 million in revenue-sharing dollars they'll get this year? Think the Twins would be the AL Central favorites without the $21 million they'll get?

 

The A's, according to sources, will get about $19 million. The Tigers: $17 million. The Reds: $15 million. The Padres: $8 million. The Rangers: $8 million.

 

And that doesn't even include the $20 million or so each team collects in national TV money. Or the $4 million they're about to get from the new XM radio deal. Or the $6 million to $8 million each team gets from the swelling central fund.

 

So you have some clubs taking in close to $50 million these days before they ever sell a ticket. And the only teams that are really hopeless are the clubs that won't plow all their MLB welfare money into payroll. The Devil Rays, for instance, are believed to be receiving $30 million in revenue sharing alone ? and will barely even use all of that on their major-league salaries. That's their fault, not the system's fault."

 

From: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/stor...yson&id=2010302

 

 

Are the Marlins spending all of their revenue sharing dollars on the payroll???

payroll/stadium

 

Revenue sharing was probably a big reason the Marlins could sign Carlos this year

their payroll is 65 million and their getting about 50 million in total so I say they are.

Are the Marlins spending all of their revenue sharing dollars on the payroll???709046[/snapback]

 

I think the acquisition of Carlos Delgado can answer that...

This article suggests that the Marlins are getting around $57 million from the league/tv deals. That is almost enough to cover our entire payroll without selling tickets/merchandise/licensing and the normal sources of revenue for a team. We were paying for a about a $50 million payroll w/o this revenue sharing and tv deals two years ago. I was just wondering if our payroll shouldn't be closer to $80. With that kind of subsidizing, we should have been able to resign pavano and sign delgado. But with that said, I don't know if I trust this article and that $57 million figure.

This article suggests that the Marlins are getting around $57 million from the league/tv deals. That is almost enough to cover our entire payroll without selling tickets/merchandise/licensing and the normal sources of revenue for a team. We were paying for a about a $50 million payroll w/o this revenue sharing and tv deals two years ago. I was just wondering if our payroll shouldn't be closer to $80. With that kind of subsidizing, we should have been able to resign pavano and sign delgado. But with that said, I don't know if I trust this article and that $57 million figure.

709052[/snapback]

 

We didn't need Pavano at $10 Mill a year.

 

And I can't blame Loria for not spending more than he did. Why? Because A) We already have the best team in the NL... and B) If I had lost $20 Mill a year for the last two years, I'd want to spend as little as I can and make as much as I can too.

The XM deal can't be worth $4M. That'd mean XM bought the rights for the $120M per year!

This article suggests that the Marlins are getting around $57 million from the league/tv deals. That is almost enough to cover our entire payroll without selling tickets/merchandise/licensing and the normal sources of revenue for a team. We were paying for a about a $50 million payroll w/o this revenue sharing and tv deals two years ago. I was just wondering if our payroll shouldn't be closer to $80. With that kind of subsidizing, we should have been able to resign pavano and sign delgado. But with that said, I don't know if I trust this article and that $57 million figure.

709052[/snapback]

Those other normal sources don't exist for this team thanks to Huizenga. The only other revenue the Marlins get is from ticket sales. Selling the cheapest tickets in the game to 17-23K ain't going to net too much.

 

You're also forgetting the other expenses. There's rent at Pro Player, and the salaries of concessionaires. The Holland, Dominican and Venezuela camps. Repairing Roger Dean. Salaries and bonuses to minor leaguers. Non-player personnel.

That $57 Million figure (if accurate - which I doubt) doesn't include a lot of other revenues/expenses. For instance, let's assume the Marlins get $4 Million from XM. If that's true, you can bet the Marlins local radio deal is worth less to them than it was last year, and WQAM most likely isn't paying much. Same with the local TV deal - particularly, if the national TV deal is $20 Million!! That would mean that the deal was paying MLB $620 Million this year alone. I doubt that's true. And what the hell is this "cental fund?" I've never heard about it before, but apparently it's somehow is worth up to $240 Million to MLB a year. And what about merchandising, local TV deals, earning from spring training (which BTW they collect, because they don't have to pay their main players any more money to show up). Anyway, if this article is true...I'm completely against public money for a new Marlins' stadium, because it would mean that the Marlins are lying about losing $20 Million every year.

 

Even though the Marlins don't get money from the luxury boxes and concessions, and they only get a small % of the parking money, I doubt the Marlins actually lose money having to keep Dolphins Stadium operating during a game (having to pay rent/marlins' employees, utilities - if they're even responsible for that - and other costs related to simply allowing the Marlins to play at Dolphins Stadium). The main cost supposedly eating away at the Marlins' bottom line is the player's payroll - and this $57 Million figure seriously calls into question whether Loria is bleeding money to field a competitive team. BTW, even if we didn't sign Delgado and Lieter, we'd still be damn competitive, and their removal from our current payroll would mean that the Marlins would know that they have made more revenue in all this pooled MLB money than they're expenses - and thus actually earn a profit before the doors open.

The XM deal can't be worth $4M. That'd mean XM bought the rights for the $120M per year!

709057[/snapback]

 

Come on R, you're sharper than that.

 

$120 Million they bought it for. Divide that by the 30 teams. And wow-wee, you get $4 million per team per year.

I know the math is right. The figure however is not. XM's contract is $650M over ten years.