Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
SonOfJack

Marlins one of 3 MLB teams to lose money

Recommended Posts

Anyone else getting the feeling Jeter is purposely showing exactly what Miami is as a Market and is eventually going to use it to try to force the team out of here?

I know he can't do it until 2035 or something like that, but it's only 16 years away and if it doesn't work here...wouldn't MLB try to make it happen sooner.

Miami-Dade's already trying to correct the contract and stuff and like the article says- it's a pandoras box. Any change could result in a year to year lease like Oakland has w the Raiders.

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/article157638494.html

The weird part is, showing actual attendance- claiming were losing money and not having a consistent cash flow could be enough to bring about contraction. I don't think the lease can be enforced if the teams contracted. It just says if there is a team it has to be in Miami right?

Could MLB contract the Marlins and Rays in a few years, and open expansion teams in other cities after a dispersal draft of sorts?

Just thinking out loud w my tinfoil hat- but this shit w Jeter isn't sitting right w me. Somethings telling me "On the surface, he's trying to bring fans back- but he's hedging his bets and if it doesn't work they can say "Told you so, I tried, get me out of here". "

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Piazza31 said:

Anyone else getting the feeling Jeter is purposely showing exactly what Miami is as a Market and is eventually going to use it to try to force the team out of here?

I know he can't do it until 2035 or something like that, but it's only 16 years away and if it doesn't work here...wouldn't MLB try to make it happen sooner.

Miami-Dade's already trying to correct the contract and stuff and like the article says- it's a pandoras box. Any change could result in a year to year lease like Oakland has w the Raiders.

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/article157638494.html

The weird part is, showing actual attendance- claiming were losing money and not having a consistent cash flow could be enough to bring about contraction. I don't think the lease can be enforced if the teams contracted. It just says if there is a team it has to be in Miami right?

Could MLB contract the Marlins and Rays in a few years, and open expansion teams in other cities after a dispersal draft of sorts?

Just thinking out loud w my tinfoil hat- but this shit w Jeter isn't sitting right w me. Somethings telling me "On the surface, he's trying to bring fans back- but he's hedging his bets and if it doesn't work they can say "Told you so, I tried, get me out of here". "

I don't understand what you're getting at.  The stadium is there and the team is here, both with contracts to be here.  How would that suddenly turn into a year to year thing?

That article didn't say anything about taking money from the stadium, which is already built.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t see expansion or contraction ever happening.  The MLBPA would go insane over the idea of contraction.  Expansion doesn’t do anything to benefit current ownership groups financially.  It has been fifty years since MLB expanded for reasons that didn’t involve avoiding a financial burden to the current owners.  The two rounds of expansion in 1990 were done because there was a massive settlement awarded to the players union from collusion in the 1980s.  Commissioner Vincent has said directly that the leagues expanded to collect expansion fees to pay that debt.  The expansion into Seattle and Toronto in 1977 was done in part to avoid the legal burden that had been ongoing with King County when the Pilots left town (Toronto gave the AL the requisite expansion partner and the Canadian presence that the national league already had). 

With the way revenue is generated and shared, and with the markets already covered by baseball, there isn’t a logical place for baseball to go that would further enrich owners.  That is what it is all about.  Also, by adding two franchises you make them a little less scarce, and down the road scarcity impacts NAV.  The more scarce a resource is the more valuable it is. 

Back to Marlins ownership, Bruce Sherman would never pay $1.2 billion for a team and then ask a retired shortstop to come in a run it into the ground to try and relocate. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rob Manfred has talked quite a bit about expansion, though it's waiting for stadium situations in Tampa/Oakland to be finalized.   Tampa's is back up in the air and Oakland's isn't set in stone, but they're working on it, so it'll be at least another 5+ years minimum before they'd consider expansion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, THRILLHO said:

I don’t see expansion or contraction ever happening.  The MLBPA would go insane over the idea of contraction.  Expansion doesn’t do anything to benefit current ownership groups financially.  It has been fifty years since MLB expanded for reasons that didn’t involve avoiding a financial burden to the current owners.  The two rounds of expansion in 1990 were done because there was a massive settlement awarded to the players union from collusion in the 1980s.  Commissioner Vincent has said directly that the leagues expanded to collect expansion fees to pay that debt.  The expansion into Seattle and Toronto in 1977 was done in part to avoid the legal burden that had been ongoing with King County when the Pilots left town (Toronto gave the AL the requisite expansion partner and the Canadian presence that the national league already had). 

With the way revenue is generated and shared, and with the markets already covered by baseball, there isn’t a logical place for baseball to go that would further enrich owners.  That is what it is all about.  Also, by adding two franchises you make them a little less scarce, and down the road scarcity impacts NAV.  The more scarce a resource is the more valuable it is. 

Back to Marlins ownership, Bruce Sherman would never pay $1.2 billion for a team and then ask a retired shortstop to come in a run it into the ground to try and relocate. 

expansion IS happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully the A's can get the needed approvals for Howard Terminal by end of year.  

The Rays... well if any team needs to relocate its that team.  

A lot of sense:

Move the Rays to:

Montreal

Portland

Monterrey ( i guess)

Expansion in the other two cities.

If not Monterrey then I'd go somewhere like a Nashville, Vancouver or Charlotte.  

I think Montreal and Portland are done deals whenever it all comes around again. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Das Texan said:

Hopefully the A's can get the needed approvals for Howard Terminal by end of year.  

The Rays... well if any team needs to relocate its that team.  

A lot of sense:

Move the Rays to:

Montreal

Portland

Monterrey ( i guess)

Expansion in the other two cities.

If not Monterrey then I'd go somewhere like a Nashville, Vancouver or Charlotte.  

I think Montreal and Portland are done deals whenever it all comes around again. 

 

Expansion opinion pieces are popular online.  Even Fangraphs has published some.  They all fail to adequately explain how the 30 owners that run the league would benefit.  Those are the people that would be making the decision to expand. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  



×
×
  • Create New...