rferry Posted November 12, 2007 Share Posted November 12, 2007 The ability to profit following the opening of a new stadium is immediate and needs little investment. Following that period, when fan investment must be sustained by actions by the owner, would be the ideal time. However, if promised the revenue streams materialize and make it possible, the decision will be an easy one to make. For any owner to make, whether 99% of owners who make no personal financial investment in the operations or the rare one who does. The thing I would be worried about is if the ownership, Loria or another, would trust the market to act on their investments. If that 90-win club will only make a return if they make the playoffs, would the owners risk it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pierremvp1 Posted November 12, 2007 Share Posted November 12, 2007 The ability to profit following the opening of a new stadium is immediate and needs little investment. Following that period, when fan investment must be sustained by actions by the owner, would be the ideal time. However, if promised the revenue streams materialize and make it possible, the decision will be an easy one to make. For any owner to make, whether 99% of owners who make no personal financial investment in the operations or the rare one who does. The thing I would be worried about is if the ownership, Loria or another, would trust the market to act on their investments. If that 90-win club will only make a return if they make the playoffs, would the owners risk it? RFerry, you make a good point above......I think. As I've found is often the case with you, you have very worthwhile thoughts to add, but you have a problem in communicating those thoughts clearly via the written word. Please take this as a compliment on your thoughts, and some constructive criticism on your writing. And please try and elucidate futher in a clearer way on your above thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rferry Posted November 13, 2007 Share Posted November 13, 2007 edit: The ability to profit following the opening of a new stadium is immediate and needs little investment. Following that period, when fan investment must be sustained by actions by the owner, would be the ideal to sell the club.. However, if promised the revenue streams materialize and make it possible, the decision to sell, keep at modest profit or invest in the club would be an easy one to make. That would be so for any owner to make, whether the 99% of owners who make no personal financial investment in the operations or the rare one who does. The thing I would be worried about is if the ownership, Loria or another, would trust the market to act on their investments. If that 90-win club will only make a healthy return if they make the playoffs, would the owners take that risk? In baseball, there's a saying that fielding a second-place team is not worth it. In a market like Miami, a well-funded club that misses the playoffs may turn out to be an albatross on the club. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prinmemito Posted November 13, 2007 Share Posted November 13, 2007 You still need some work. Your writing is passive, which makes it harder to follow for a sustained period of time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiamiManiac131 Posted November 14, 2007 Share Posted November 14, 2007 I've heard it a million times and refuse to get excited until it actually happens, but some very reliable sources I have are pointing to a December 2007 Stadium Announcement... We can only hope! Also - as far as the Orange Bowl site goes, don't forget that attendence will be boosted by the locals there. It's a highly Cuban area and many of the people who live there can't afford to go to Dolphin Stadium (or simply can't get up there). If the team keeps ticket prices reasonable, the residents can walk up and fill the house. Just another aspect to take into consideration... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boggeymann Posted November 14, 2007 Share Posted November 14, 2007 I can see why they want a DOWNTOWN crowd b/c they tend to bring in big bucks and pay 14 bucks for a dewars etc. The economic cenus for that area household near the OB isn't that high and may not spend the dollars they would hope for, but you take what you can get at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Altamonte Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 I've heard it a million times and refuse to get excited until it actually happens, but some very reliable sources I have are pointing to a December 2007 Stadium Announcement... We can only hope! Also - as far as the Orange Bowl site goes, don't forget that attendence will be boosted by the locals there. It's a highly Cuban area and many of the people who live there can't afford to go to Dolphin Stadium (or simply can't get up there). If the team keeps ticket prices reasonable, the residents can walk up and fill the house. Just another aspect to take into consideration... I don't see the OB site bringing more fans because it's in Little Havana...I may be wrong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freedrinks23 Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 Ticket prices are likely to be higher than they currently are at DS. Agreed. If the Marlins are putting up $210 million, they are going to raise ticket prices a lot, as any responsible business would do. And the crowds won't be coming. OB site is a sham. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy42Jack0 Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 Ticket prices are likely to be higher than they currently are at DS. Agreed. If the Marlins are putting up $210 million, they are going to raise ticket prices a lot, as any responsible business would do. And the crowds won't be coming. OB site is a sham. a reasonable product on the field and no worry of weather will attract many, many fans Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legacyofCangelosi Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 Ticket prices are likely to be higher than they currently are at DS. Agreed. If the Marlins are putting up $210 million, they are going to raise ticket prices a lot, as any responsible business would do. And the crowds won't be coming. OB site is a sham. a reasonable product on the field and no worry of weather will attract many, many fans Closer to the center of the city, larger population base, roof so no wather worries, a few miles away from coconut grove, mary brickell village, and the 836 east which leads to south beach. Definitely more fans especially if the product on the field is worth watching. Only the downtown site was a better location Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DelGOT2Rings Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 He could move the team and play in a minor league park and still make 10's of millions in revenue sharing and .com revenue. You really have no idea how the business of baseball works do you? Do you think the rest of the owners would let him move into a minor league park because it would take a vote by the executive committee then a vote of all the owners before he can move the team anywhere. Or is it you're blinded by your hatred you're not thinking straight? If you guys want to hate Loria that's fair. You're a fan, you are entitled to your opinion. I'm not going to tell you what to think. But if your belief system is founded on thoughts like this you really ought to take a few minutes to reevaluate your position. Actually, assuming that the lease runs out in 2010 and Huzeinga doesn't want to have the Marlins as tenants anymore, how would the owners prevent Loria from playing his home games at the Marlins' spring traning facility in 2011 (almost like the minor leagues)? Even though Huzeinga received the "tax rebate" for allowing the Marlins to play in DS, I don't think the league or the Marlins can force Huizenga to keep the Marlins as a tenant. So, while I get your point that Loria can't just up and move his team without the consent of MLB (and the owners), in 2011 Loria might be able to get away with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marlins97-03 Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 He could move the team and play in a minor league park and still make 10's of millions in revenue sharing and .com revenue. You really have no idea how the business of baseball works do you? Do you think the rest of the owners would let him move into a minor league park because it would take a vote by the executive committee then a vote of all the owners before he can move the team anywhere. Or is it you're blinded by your hatred you're not thinking straight? If you guys want to hate Loria that's fair. You're a fan, you are entitled to your opinion. I'm not going to tell you what to think. But if your belief system is founded on thoughts like this you really ought to take a few minutes to reevaluate your position. Actually, assuming that the lease runs out in 2010 and Huzeinga doesn't want to have the Marlins as tenants anymore, how would the owners prevent Loria from playing his home games at the Marlins' spring traning facility in 2011 (almost like the minor leagues)? Even though Huzeinga received the "tax rebate" for allowing the Marlins to play in DS, I don't think the league or the Marlins can force Huizenga to keep the Marlins as a tenant. So, while I get your point that Loria can't just up and move his team without the consent of MLB (and the owners), in 2011 Loria might be able to get away with that. If a stadium deal is reached, Huizenga said he would allow the marlins to play on year to year lease until the stadium is built. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DelGOT2Rings Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 He could move the team and play in a minor league park and still make 10's of millions in revenue sharing and .com revenue. You really have no idea how the business of baseball works do you? Do you think the rest of the owners would let him move into a minor league park because it would take a vote by the executive committee then a vote of all the owners before he can move the team anywhere. Or is it you're blinded by your hatred you're not thinking straight? If you guys want to hate Loria that's fair. You're a fan, you are entitled to your opinion. I'm not going to tell you what to think. But if your belief system is founded on thoughts like this you really ought to take a few minutes to reevaluate your position. Actually, assuming that the lease runs out in 2010 and Huzeinga doesn't want to have the Marlins as tenants anymore, how would the owners prevent Loria from playing his home games at the Marlins' spring traning facility in 2011 (almost like the minor leagues)? Even though Huzeinga received the "tax rebate" for allowing the Marlins to play in DS, I don't think the league or the Marlins can force Huizenga to keep the Marlins as a tenant. So, while I get your point that Loria can't just up and move his team without the consent of MLB (and the owners), in 2011 Loria might be able to get away with that. If a stadium deal is reached, Huizenga said he would allow the marlins to play on year to year lease until the stadium is built. He doesn't want to look like the bad guy here. He never said it was over come 2010, the Marlins did. However, if WayneH came out and said no more Marlins at his stadium, what could the Marlins or MLB do to keep them there?? Other than trying to get the state to force him into keeping the relationship going because WayneH already took the tax rebate (which he might willingly give up if it means no more Marlins ...aka no more dirt infield during football and more flexible dates for concerts and events during baseball season), I don't think the Marlins or MLB can do a whole lot. WayneH would LOVE to keep the Marlins there under the current lease arrangement, but the Marlins would be fools to re-lease under those terms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anotherrealfan Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 He could move the team and play in a minor league park and still make 10's of millions in revenue sharing and .com revenue. You really have no idea how the business of baseball works do you? Do you think the rest of the owners would let him move into a minor league park because it would take a vote by the executive committee then a vote of all the owners before he can move the team anywhere. Or is it you're blinded by your hatred you're not thinking straight? If you guys want to hate Loria that's fair. You're a fan, you are entitled to your opinion. I'm not going to tell you what to think. But if your belief system is founded on thoughts like this you really ought to take a few minutes to reevaluate your position. Actually, assuming that the lease runs out in 2010 and Huzeinga doesn't want to have the Marlins as tenants anymore, how would the owners prevent Loria from playing his home games at the Marlins' spring traning facility in 2011 (almost like the minor leagues)? Even though Huzeinga received the "tax rebate" for allowing the Marlins to play in DS, I don't think the league or the Marlins can force Huizenga to keep the Marlins as a tenant. So, while I get your point that Loria can't just up and move his team without the consent of MLB (and the owners), in 2011 Loria might be able to get away with that. If a stadium deal is reached, Huizenga said he would allow the marlins to play on year to year lease until the stadium is built. 03, maybe I give you too much credit. It should be obvious, but apparently not to you, that I would not believe that Loria could move the Marlins to a minor league park. The point was that attendance is not an issue with Loria, nor is increasing payroll. He makes more money running the team as cheaply as possible. Granted, I do not spend my days and nights "studying" the business of baseball as you do, it would take the fun out of being a fan, yet, I know business pretty damn well, and would not be difficult to fully understand all of the nuances of baseball business is I choose to ignore my current business, my clients etc. So, I leave the 7000 word posts to you and try to join in on the conversations without insulting others. As far as the stadium issue, I seem to recall that part of the deal with the Canes would make it very difficult for the Marlins to continue beyond 2010. It may be that he promised no more infield after 2010-I dont know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rferry Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 He could move the team and play in a minor league park and still make 10's of millions in revenue sharing and .com revenue. You really have no idea how the business of baseball works do you? Do you think the rest of the owners would let him move into a minor league park because it would take a vote by the executive committee then a vote of all the owners before he can move the team anywhere. Or is it you're blinded by your hatred you're not thinking straight? If you guys want to hate Loria that's fair. You're a fan, you are entitled to your opinion. I'm not going to tell you what to think. But if your belief system is founded on thoughts like this you really ought to take a few minutes to reevaluate your position. Actually, assuming that the lease runs out in 2010 and Huzeinga doesn't want to have the Marlins as tenants anymore, how would the owners prevent Loria from playing his home games at the Marlins' spring traning facility in 2011 (almost like the minor leagues)? Even though Huzeinga received the "tax rebate" for allowing the Marlins to play in DS, I don't think the league or the Marlins can force Huizenga to keep the Marlins as a tenant. So, while I get your point that Loria can't just up and move his team without the consent of MLB (and the owners), in 2011 Loria might be able to get away with that. Did you guys miss the past 10 years or something? In the post-Huizenga era, the Marlins have struggled to meet their many obligations through league subsidies alone. The main reason is because the lease at Dolphins Stadium does not allow the revenue sources available to the other 29 teams in the league. Moving into a temporary or substandard park would not help the Marlins, or their owners' pocket book. It is foolish to think Loria, or any Marlins owner, would do so. They don't stand to benefit at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marlins2003 Posted November 17, 2007 Share Posted November 17, 2007 He could move the team and play in a minor league park and still make 10's of millions in revenue sharing and .com revenue. You really have no idea how the business of baseball works do you? Do you think the rest of the owners would let him move into a minor league park because it would take a vote by the executive committee then a vote of all the owners before he can move the team anywhere. Or is it you're blinded by your hatred you're not thinking straight? If you guys want to hate Loria that's fair. You're a fan, you are entitled to your opinion. I'm not going to tell you what to think. But if your belief system is founded on thoughts like this you really ought to take a few minutes to reevaluate your position. Actually, assuming that the lease runs out in 2010 and Huzeinga doesn't want to have the Marlins as tenants anymore, how would the owners prevent Loria from playing his home games at the Marlins' spring traning facility in 2011 (almost like the minor leagues)? Even though Huzeinga received the "tax rebate" for allowing the Marlins to play in DS, I don't think the league or the Marlins can force Huizenga to keep the Marlins as a tenant. So, while I get your point that Loria can't just up and move his team without the consent of MLB (and the owners), in 2011 Loria might be able to get away with that. If a stadium deal is reached, Huizenga said he would allow the marlins to play on year to year lease until the stadium is built. 03, maybe I give you too much credit. It should be obvious, but apparently not to you, that I would not believe that Loria could move the Marlins to a minor league park. The point was that attendance is not an issue with Loria, nor is increasing payroll. He makes more money running the team as cheaply as possible. Granted, I do not spend my days and nights "studying" the business of baseball as you do, it would take the fun out of being a fan, yet, I know business pretty damn well, and would not be difficult to fully understand all of the nuances of baseball business is I choose to ignore my current business, my clients etc. So, I leave the 7000 word posts to you and try to join in on the conversations without insulting others. As far as the stadium issue, I seem to recall that part of the deal with the Canes would make it very difficult for the Marlins to continue beyond 2010. It may be that he promised no more infield after 2010-I dont know. When it comes to being insulting, don't be modest, you're right up there with the best of them. If you don't understand the corelation between attendence and profitability I can't help you and I don't think anyone can. Your statement is the perfect example of the saying, "garbage in, garbage out." You start with false assumptions, you wind up with flawed conclusions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy42Jack0 Posted November 17, 2007 Share Posted November 17, 2007 Ticket prices are likely to be higher than they currently are at DS. Agreed. If the Marlins are putting up $210 million, they are going to raise ticket prices a lot, as any responsible business would do. And the crowds won't be coming. OB site is a sham. a reasonable product on the field and no worry of weather will attract many, many fans Not necessarily from that neighborhood and the location will make it more difficult from fans from other areas to make it in comparison to a downtown site. as opposed to now? where the stadium is in the middle of nowhere? with no way to prevent weather?...this site isnt nearly as bad as many are making it out to be...and if we have a competitive team on the field...people would travel from all over southern florida to see a good team in a brand spankin new retractable roof ballpark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Altamonte Posted November 17, 2007 Share Posted November 17, 2007 Jimmy the OB is a bad site. The only worse site possible i could think of would be Homestead (I am being fictitious). Homestead itself would be easier to develop into something nicer than the restrictions of the OB site allow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DelGOT2Rings Posted November 18, 2007 Share Posted November 18, 2007 He could move the team and play in a minor league park and still make 10's of millions in revenue sharing and .com revenue. You really have no idea how the business of baseball works do you? Do you think the rest of the owners would let him move into a minor league park because it would take a vote by the executive committee then a vote of all the owners before he can move the team anywhere. Or is it you're blinded by your hatred you're not thinking straight? If you guys want to hate Loria that's fair. You're a fan, you are entitled to your opinion. I'm not going to tell you what to think. But if your belief system is founded on thoughts like this you really ought to take a few minutes to reevaluate your position. Actually, assuming that the lease runs out in 2010 and Huzeinga doesn't want to have the Marlins as tenants anymore, how would the owners prevent Loria from playing his home games at the Marlins' spring traning facility in 2011 (almost like the minor leagues)? Even though Huzeinga received the "tax rebate" for allowing the Marlins to play in DS, I don't think the league or the Marlins can force Huizenga to keep the Marlins as a tenant. So, while I get your point that Loria can't just up and move his team without the consent of MLB (and the owners), in 2011 Loria might be able to get away with that. Did you guys miss the past 10 years or something? In the post-Huizenga era, the Marlins have struggled to meet their many obligations through league subsidies alone. The main reason is because the lease at Dolphins Stadium does not allow the revenue sources available to the other 29 teams in the league. Moving into a temporary or substandard park would not help the Marlins, or their owners' pocket book. It is foolish to think Loria, or any Marlins owner, would do so. They don't stand to benefit at all. Other than luxury suites, what revenue sources are you suggesting the Marlins would reap at DS and not a temporary site? Parking, concessions, and advertising revenues are significantly restricted for the Marlins in DS, and would be available at another location. That isn't chump change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rferry Posted November 18, 2007 Share Posted November 18, 2007 Parking, concessions and advertising revenues would be available in the most minimal sense at a temporary ballpark as to be insignificant if not operating at a loss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DelGOT2Rings Posted November 18, 2007 Share Posted November 18, 2007 Parking, concessions and advertising revenues would be available in the most minimal sense at a temporary ballpark as to be insignificant if not operating at a loss. Let me start off by saying I don't think the Marlins will move to some temporary site, and I am not advocating them to do so. But what is that opinion based on? Huizenga reaps the LIONSHARE of revenues (not just profits) for advertising, parking, and concessions. First, Huizenga contracts the concession duties out to an outside company to work any event at DS, whether it is a concert, fins game, or marlins game. In return, the outside company pays a HUGE licensing fee to Huizenga. Basically, Huizenga reaps a huge profit by doing this, throws all the risk (and reward) of large concession sales to the outside company (this year I believe Boston Concessions), and squeezes out the Marlins from receiving any money from these sales, other than a nominal fee (fixed) given to Loria for each game. Loria could play the Marlins games at a highschool stadium and receive more money from concessions than he does now. We're talking millions in revenues, and potential huge profits (not to mention huge money from exclusive licensing arrangements - bud over miller beer; coke over pepsi, etc.). I know for a fact he makes more during spring training games (not "insignificant"), so why couldn't Loria receive those if the Marlins played regular season games at the spring training facility? Second, Huizenga receives a huge amount of profits for advertising inside the stadium. The "Toyota Camry zone." the fixed Budweiser signs all over the stadium, etc. These go directly to Huizenga, and Loria never sees them. In a temporary stadium (let's say the Marlins spring training facility), these would go DIRECTLY to Loria. Why would these revenues be "insignificant" at a temporary place, where they would all go to Loria? We're talking millions here. Third, how is parking insignificant?? At $10/car, with a two or three thousand cars a game (conservative) for 81 games, that is a few million dollars. Right now, while Loria does receive about a good share of this revenue, Huizenga owns the lot and receives a huge percentage. You could hold the Marlins games at Lockhart stadium and receive this kind of money, none of which goes in Loria's pockets now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy42Jack0 Posted November 18, 2007 Share Posted November 18, 2007 Jimmy the OB is a bad site. The only worse site possible i could think of would be Homestead (I am being fictitious). Homestead itself would be easier to develop into something nicer than the restrictions of the OB site allow but many ballparks are on "bad" sites...its the idea of a new baseball park and the presentation the organization gives the ballpark/site that will attract fans...fenway is in one of the worst neighborhoods in boston, yankee stadium is in the dump otherwise known as the bronx, coors field was built in a run down part of denver, and so on and so forth...the ballpark will be responsible for revitalizing the area...and if we have a competitive team, then we should be attracting alot of fans, which will in turn attract restaurants, memorabilia places, etc...but none of this is possible if we never get the damn stadium built Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rferry Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 But a temporary facility would not have that many parking spaces available and likely attract fewer fans to park, eat and be subjected to advertisements. 100% of nothing ain't much more than 1% of nothing. A temporary facility would also call for some restructuring to even provide those services, let alone for a baseball team let alone for a major league baseball club. Think of employees, added security and so on. Those costs could eliminate the small profits, if any, of a temporary facility with fair lease terms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anotherrealfan Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 He could move the team and play in a minor league park and still make 10's of millions in revenue sharing and .com revenue. You really have no idea how the business of baseball works do you? Do you think the rest of the owners would let him move into a minor league park because it would take a vote by the executive committee then a vote of all the owners before he can move the team anywhere. Or is it you're blinded by your hatred you're not thinking straight? If you guys want to hate Loria that's fair. You're a fan, you are entitled to your opinion. I'm not going to tell you what to think. But if your belief system is founded on thoughts like this you really ought to take a few minutes to reevaluate your position. Actually, assuming that the lease runs out in 2010 and Huzeinga doesn't want to have the Marlins as tenants anymore, how would the owners prevent Loria from playing his home games at the Marlins' spring traning facility in 2011 (almost like the minor leagues)? Even though Huzeinga received the "tax rebate" for allowing the Marlins to play in DS, I don't think the league or the Marlins can force Huizenga to keep the Marlins as a tenant. So, while I get your point that Loria can't just up and move his team without the consent of MLB (and the owners), in 2011 Loria might be able to get away with that. If a stadium deal is reached, Huizenga said he would allow the marlins to play on year to year lease until the stadium is built. 03, maybe I give you too much credit. It should be obvious, but apparently not to you, that I would not believe that Loria could move the Marlins to a minor league park. The point was that attendance is not an issue with Loria, nor is increasing payroll. He makes more money running the team as cheaply as possible. Granted, I do not spend my days and nights "studying" the business of baseball as you do, it would take the fun out of being a fan, yet, I know business pretty damn well, and would not be difficult to fully understand all of the nuances of baseball business is I choose to ignore my current business, my clients etc. So, I leave the 7000 word posts to you and try to join in on the conversations without insulting others. As far as the stadium issue, I seem to recall that part of the deal with the Canes would make it very difficult for the Marlins to continue beyond 2010. It may be that he promised no more infield after 2010-I dont know. When it comes to being insulting, don't be modest, you're right up there with the best of them. If you don't understand the corelation between attendence and profitability I can't help you and I don't think anyone can. Your statement is the perfect example of the saying, "garbage in, garbage out." You start with false assumptions, you wind up with flawed conclusions. Why must you act like such a jerk so often. You provide interesting insight in many cases and then bring yourself down many notches. Thanks for the first statement above, false as it may be, but one only thinks like one acts himself. This is a baseball board, I made my statement, live with it-otherwise you have issues that I cannot "help you" with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Out of the Past Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 I don't know if it was mentioned anywhere but yesterday Barry Jackson in the Herald quoted city commissioner Sanchez saying the Marlins have reduced their contribution by $30 million to $40 million and that he's losing his patience with the Marlins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.