RFerry,

 

If the franchise was so insolvent, and in such desperate need to find a more favorable lease, then why would the team back out of the recent Orange Bowl agreement? Wouldn't it be better to take a deal that they had previously agreed to -- and would therefore obviously be financially viable -- than to sentence themselves to the profitless situation at Dolphins Stadium?

 

(The logical answer to that is that the situation isn't nearly as onerous as they make it out to be, otherwise circumstances would force their hand to commit to a stadium deal in the name of profit.)

I recall Forbes finding that the Marlins are the most profitable MLB team (before looking at TV network revenues.)

Reading reports for years and years of their owners and MLB owners stating the opposite didn't leave you suspicious enough to check Forbes' findings? If you did, you had found it was for one single year - the year in which they dropped payroll dramatically.

Well since profit is equal to total revenue minus total cost, that's pretty obvious. :banghead I'm just saying that there was enough money to pay Miggy to stay, and also enough money to make a more sizable contribution towards a stadium.

Yet you needed Forbes to tell you? Oh, wait, you didn't even look at Forbes. You heard something about it from somewhere and decided the Marlins have been, are and always be a profitable franchise because of one singular report from one singular source in the entire span of the franchise. Makes perfect sense.

 

Who pissed in your Wheaties this morning?

 

I did read the Forbes report, I was the first to link it to this board. I said nothing regarding the Marlins being profitable long term, kinda hard to do with horrible attendance and no stadium revenues. Is there something personal that you want to get off of your chest? I'd like to hear it.

RFerry,

 

If the franchise was so insolvent, and in such desperate need to find a more favorable lease, then why would the team back out of the recent Orange Bowl agreement? Wouldn't it be better to take a deal that they had previously agreed to -- and would therefore obviously be financially viable -- than to sentence themselves to the profitless situation at Dolphins Stadium?

 

(The logical answer to that is that the situation isn't nearly as onerous as they make it out to be, otherwise circumstances would force their hand to commit to a stadium deal in the name of profit.)

Who said it was insolvent? No one. Unprofitable operations due to the lease, lack of incentives to improve the team, restrained broadcast rights, franchise selling price... sure. But MLB won't let them go bankrupt and revenue sharing exists to keep them afloat or avoid losing money out of pocket.

There's no point in agreeing to a deal that may offer only a similar situation as the present. Especially if you believe, as MLB has a history of, that a better deal is along the way. It's never been about making the Marlins' financially solvent or keeping the Marlins in South Florida. It's about making the Marlins a franchise people want to own (to buy and resell, participate in league operations, invest in the business to return a profit, etc.)

Sorry. Nothing personal. Just addressing one of the many misunderstood rumors out there that have been manipulated by critics of the organization to suit their cause.

Oh don't worry about offending me. It would take much more than that to offend me. I had thought that you had used that term in the past. I mistakenly attributed it to you.

 

The question remains, though, why back out of a deal where you stand to make a tremendous increase in profit and to which you had previously agreed? If they are not getting the revenue they need from luxury boxes, tickets, parking, etc, and they had a deal in place that satisfied those needs, why back out of it?

Or he is just focusing his efforts on destroying it completely so he can sell it to MLB for an enormous profit...something he is known to do.

 

No matter what he sells it for it will be enormously more than his orginal Montreal price.

What percentage of the stadium usage do you think will be Marlins related and who do you think will control the management of the stadium?

 

The orginal deal gave the Marlins total control over the stadium. My understanding of what has been negotiated in this last round is while the Marlins will be year round tenants (offices, etc.) they will in effect rent the stadium for 81 home games+ (time in between, etc.) and the city/county will control usage (concerts, political conventions, whatever) in the off months.

 

All this is subject to the final deal but that in itself is a quantum change in the original terms.

 

And a much better deal for the taxpayers who will be paying for the whole thing upfront.

Oh don't worry about offending me. It would take much more than that to offend me. I had thought that you had used that term in the past. I mistakenly attributed it to you.

 

The question remains, though, why back out of a deal where you stand to make a tremendous increase in profit and to which you had previously agreed? If they are not getting the revenue they need from luxury boxes, tickets, parking, etc, and they had a deal in place that satisfied those needs, why back out of it?

I used the term to describe revenue sharing's effect on the franchise's finances.

 

1. They had not previously agreed to the plan with the Orange Bowl 100% decided.

2. Why seek out a tremendous increase in profit if all that may mean is an insignificant amount? A haypenny is a huge increase when all you've got is a penny, but what are haypennies are worth? It is not in MLB and the Marlins' owners' interests to make the Marlins secure and sustainable, it's in their interests to make them profitable.

3. If it is your belief that you can squeeze more concessions out of the city/county/state, you'd likely hold out as long as you're not losing out on any money.

It is not in MLB and the Marlins' owners' interests to make the Marlins secure and sustainable, it's in their interests to make them profitable.

 

You mean like they already are?

For those who were sure the proposed games PR was a harbinger of things to come:

 

"No Puerto Rico trip: Major League Baseball approached the Marlins about playing a series next season in San Juan, Puerto Rico. But the idea was scrapped because the Marlins didn't want to give up any games at Dolphin Stadium."

 

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/marlins/conte...rlins_1207.html

For those who were sure the proposed games PR was a harbinger of things to come:

 

"No Puerto Rico trip: Major League Baseball approached the Marlins about playing a series next season in San Juan, Puerto Rico. But the idea was scrapped because the Marlins didn't want to give up any games at Dolphin Stadium."

 

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/marlins/conte...rlins_1207.html

 

People might actually show up to that. Loria wants to keep it where there are as few people in the stands as possible.

 

Big crowds hurt his ploy to make people "sympathetic" to his "situation".

 

That, or Loria just doesnt want to pay to fly the team and put them up in a hotel for an extra series...hurts his profit margins.

For those who were sure the proposed games PR was a harbinger of things to come:

 

"No Puerto Rico trip: Major League Baseball approached the Marlins about playing a series next season in San Juan, Puerto Rico. But the idea was scrapped because the Marlins didn't want to give up any games at Dolphin Stadium."

 

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/marlins/conte...rlins_1207.html

 

People might actually show up to that. Loria wants to keep it where there are as few people in the stands as possible.

 

Big crowds hurt his ploy to make people "sympathetic" to his "situation".

 

That, or Loria just doesnt want to pay to fly the team and put them up in a hotel for an extra series...hurts his profit margins.

 

It's absolutely amazing this ability you have to read the man's mind. It's quite a gift you have there. :hat

RFerry,

 

If the franchise was so insolvent, and in such desperate need to find a more favorable lease, then why would the team back out of the recent Orange Bowl agreement? Wouldn't it be better to take a deal that they had previously agreed to -- and would therefore obviously be financially viable -- than to sentence themselves to the profitless situation at Dolphins Stadium?

 

(The logical answer to that is that the situation isn't nearly as onerous as they make it out to be, otherwise circumstances would force their hand to commit to a stadium deal in the name of profit.)

 

I'll bite. I believe previous deal all have been vaporware, with no serious commitment from either side. These vaporware deals were made in order to lure the state to give the rebate. IMO, If a state rebate is secured then you will see another "major" roadblock appear.

 

Think about it. . . I can understand a deal being complex. But 5 years complex? some people need to be fired on both the state and the Marlins side.

It is not in MLB and the Marlins' owners' interests to make the Marlins secure and sustainable, it's in their interests to make them profitable.

 

You mean like they already are?

More is better than some. More appropriately, some is better than none.

For those who were sure the proposed games PR was a harbinger of things to come:

 

"No Puerto Rico trip: Major League Baseball approached the Marlins about playing a series next season in San Juan, Puerto Rico. But the idea was scrapped because the Marlins didn't want to give up any games at Dolphin Stadium."

 

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/marlins/conte...rlins_1207.html

 

 

Good news , the recognition that a series on PR would be bad public relations gives me hope .

For those who were sure the proposed games PR was a harbinger of things to come:

 

"No Puerto Rico trip: Major League Baseball approached the Marlins about playing a series next season in San Juan, Puerto Rico. But the idea was scrapped because the Marlins didn't want to give up any games at Dolphin Stadium."

 

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/marlins/conte...rlins_1207.html

 

People might actually show up to that. Loria wants to keep it where there are as few people in the stands as possible.

 

Big crowds hurt his ploy to make people "sympathetic" to his "situation".

 

That, or Loria just doesnt want to pay to fly the team and put them up in a hotel for an extra series...hurts his profit margins.

Something tells me if they did play in PR, people would be complaining that it's a sign Loria is testing the waters to move the team, doesn't believe in the Miami market, etc.

 

Damned if you do and damned if you don't.

I hope the Miami politicians if they in fact want baseball ( and I do think most politicians dont want to be the guys who let a major sports franchise leave on their watch ) realize if the Marlins leave it will be at least 30 years before South Florida is even considered for a team

I doubt it would take that long. All we need is a physical stadium, and Miami would constantly be mentioned as a relocation option for teams, or as a possible expansion team.

 

If you build it, they will come...

 

I'm more along the lines of the 30 year time table. South Florida has not shown it will support a MLB team. When and if MLB decides to expand again there are far better places to start a franchise than a place that is consistently at or near the bottom for attendance. I also don't see how you can think we can get a baseball stadium with a retractable roof built AFTER a team leaves here.

For those who were sure the proposed games PR was a harbinger of things to come:

 

"No Puerto Rico trip: Major League Baseball approached the Marlins about playing a series next season in San Juan, Puerto Rico. But the idea was scrapped because the Marlins didn't want to give up any games at Dolphin Stadium."

 

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/marlins/conte...rlins_1207.html

 

People might actually show up to that. Loria wants to keep it where there are as few people in the stands as possible.

 

Big crowds hurt his ploy to make people "sympathetic" to his "situation".

 

That, or Loria just doesnt want to pay to fly the team and put them up in a hotel for an extra series...hurts his profit margins.

 

It's absolutely amazing this ability you have to read the man's mind. It's quite a gift you have there. :hat

 

Wasn't he one of the ones complaining because it was a Mets seires and one of the few series that actually draw some "crowds" to the games?

Marc Bell would bid on the team if it was made available

 

 

The Penthouse guy?

yea, the Penthouse guy

 

I'm sure MLB would like one of the porn industry's leaders at the helm of a club.

It's not like he's Bob Guccione

 

He just likes to buy things with his money...

 

That may be so but he's the CEO of a hardcore pornography magazine. Porn is not something MLB would like to be associated with.

Fair enough

 

 

if he was serious he could sell the magazine pretty easily...

 

penthouse is hardcore? didnt know that. i just thought it showed more than playboy.

Gambling is waaaaaaay more socially accepted than porn.

Obviously MLB has never seen 2 Girls 1 Cup.

 

thanks for bringing that up. that movie scarred me for life.

Baseball and porn, mhmm, there is something very right about that combination.

For those who were sure the proposed games PR was a harbinger of things to come:

 

"No Puerto Rico trip: Major League Baseball approached the Marlins about playing a series next season in San Juan, Puerto Rico. But the idea was scrapped because the Marlins didn't want to give up any games at Dolphin Stadium."

 

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/marlins/conte...rlins_1207.html

 

People might actually show up to that. Loria wants to keep it where there are as few people in the stands as possible.

 

Big crowds hurt his ploy to make people "sympathetic" to his "situation".

 

That, or Loria just doesnt want to pay to fly the team and put them up in a hotel for an extra series...hurts his profit margins.

 

It's absolutely amazing this ability you have to read the man's mind. It's quite a gift you have there. :hat

 

Wasn't he one of the ones complaining because it was a Mets seires and one of the few series that actually draw some "crowds" to the games?

 

No.

just think of the mermaids