Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Friday, August 17, 2012

Megdal: How will the Mets’ owners fare without help from the league?

Megdal adds this do wah diddy…“Manfred alert!‏”

But if Fred Wilpon and his partners are to survive another winter in charge of the Mets, it appears they’ll have to do it without M.L.B.‘s help this time.

“I can’t imagine that we would be providing such assistance,” M.L.B. executive vice president of economics and league affairs Rob Manfred said in an email Friday, when asked if M.L.B. would be a source of any financial assistance for the Mets over the remainder of 2012.

Manfred also confirmed that the Mets haven’t received any financial assistance from Major League Baseball since March 2012, when the loan was repaid.

In other circumstances, this would be good news: Teams that don’t need financial help, after all, wouldn’t have received any from Major League Baseball.

But the Mets are going to need additional money from somewhere. The $240 million they received from selling off minority stakes in the team back in March is already accounted for: at least $110 million to pay off a portion of what was a $430 million debt against the team due in 2014, $25 million back to M.L.B., $40 million to pay off a bridge loan from Bank of America that allowed the team to pay operating expenses last winter, at least $43.7 million in bond payments on Citi Field due in June and December, a revenue-sharing bill due to M.L.B. that totaled $20 million in 2011, $20 million in interest on a $450 million debt against S.N.Y. due in 2015, and at least $20 million in interest on the remaining $320 million or so in debt against the team.

Repoz Posted: August 17, 2012 at 02:24 PM | 11 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: business, mets

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. bfan Posted: August 17, 2012 at 03:04 PM (#4210709)
I guess someone needs to decide whether MLB franchises are increasing in value (it sure seems that way), but rolling some of that interest into the loan doesn't seem that imprudent a thing to do by lenders. And what exactly is this "a revenue-sharing bill due to M.L.B. that totaled $20 million in 2011"; revenue is income; bill is expense-I cannot figure out what that is. if it is a bill for going over some salary cap, that would be non-recurring for 2012, correct?
   2. Swedish Chef Posted: August 17, 2012 at 03:08 PM (#4210714)
And what exactly is this "a revenue-sharing bill due to M.L.B. that totaled $20 million in 2011"; revenue is income; bill is expense-I cannot figure out what that is. if it is a bill for going over some salary cap, that would be non-recurring for 2012, correct?

I think The Yankee Clapper can explain what it is, at length. He may be somewhat biased though.
   3. Randy Jones Posted: August 17, 2012 at 03:10 PM (#4210718)
[1] You really have no idea what "revenue sharing" is in terms of MLB teams? You have to be kidding.
   4. Mayor Blomberg Posted: August 17, 2012 at 03:19 PM (#4210727)
Chef, I think you mean Yankee Redneck, not the Clapper.
   5. Swedish Chef Posted: August 17, 2012 at 03:31 PM (#4210753)
Oh no, my apologies, nobody deserves to be wrongly accused of being obsessed with revenue sharing.
   6. charityslave is thinking about baseball Posted: August 17, 2012 at 07:37 PM (#4211073)
Oh, and don't forget the billion or so they still owe to Bobby Bonilla!
   7. Walt Davis Posted: August 19, 2012 at 05:45 AM (#4211748)
bfan, you've probably put it together by now but in case not ...

That means the Mets are a team that has to pay into the revenue sharing pool. So they have a "bill" for $20 M. Appoximately $1 M of that $20 M will be used to pay the power bill on that Marlins HR thingy.
   8. bfan Posted: August 19, 2012 at 07:29 AM (#4211753)
That means the Mets are a team that has to pay into the revenue sharing poo


That is what I thought. That means that is the mets have lowered salary in 2012 (no Reyes), then that is a non-recurring expense. The article says they are going to need money, and cite that number as paid for out of the 240 million they got in March. They do not have to pay that $20 million again; that is my point.
   9. Swedish Chef Posted: August 19, 2012 at 07:50 AM (#4211758)
The article says they are going to need money, and cite that number as paid for out of the 240 million they got in March. They do not have to pay that $20 million again; that is my point.

You're thinking luxury tax, the Mets don't have the payroll to be subject to that.

But they get to pay revenue sharing because they have above-average revenue from playing in New York, you can think of it as a tax on big-market teams. The only way for them to avoid paying revenue sharing is if their revenues tank, say if the gate shrank dramatically, and that would be worse. In the new CBA there are provisions for returning revenue sharing money to the club if it would have gone to a top-15 team. So maybe their bill will be lower next year anyway.
   10. bfan Posted: August 19, 2012 at 09:07 AM (#4211795)
Thank-you; I did not understand that element of the financial structure.
   11. Lassus Posted: August 19, 2012 at 11:02 AM (#4211848)
Someone check on Yankee Redneck. The fact that he hasn't shown up in this thread has me worried he got hit by a car.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Rough Carrigan
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOTP 20 Feb. 2017: Baseball in a Time of Politics
(788 - 10:59pm, Feb 21)
Last: He who brought the butter dish to Balshazar (CoB)

NewsblogOT - December 2016 NBA thread
(2317 - 10:56pm, Feb 21)
Last: aberg

NewsblogSources: MLB, union agree to use dugout signal for intentional walk
(11 - 10:54pm, Feb 21)
Last: charityslave is thinking about baseball

NewsblogMLB commissioner Rob Manfred angry union won't agree to proposesd rule changes
(6 - 10:39pm, Feb 21)
Last: the Hugh Jorgan returns

NewsblogHow to Rationalize an Eric Hosmer Mega-Contract | FanGraphs Baseball
(27 - 10:12pm, Feb 21)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogDave Stieb on Hall of Fame: 'I surely did not deserve to be just wiped off the map' | MLB | Sporting News
(34 - 9:59pm, Feb 21)
Last: Random Transaction Generator

NewsblogMike Piazza Learns How to Be an Owner. Of a Soccer Team. In Italy.
(23 - 9:57pm, Feb 21)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogOT: January 2016 Soccer Thread
(234 - 9:50pm, Feb 21)
Last: SPICEY WITH A SIDE OF BEER ON A BABYYYYYYY

NewsblogSammy Sosa compares himself to Jesus Christ, denies PED use
(24 - 9:16pm, Feb 21)
Last: BDC

NewsblogExclusive: Facebook in talks to live stream one MLB game per week - sources
(7 - 9:15pm, Feb 21)
Last: Never Give an Inge (Dave)

NewsblogRick Ankiel drank vodka before starts to ease anxiety
(10 - 9:11pm, Feb 21)
Last: Fancy Pants with a clinging marmoset on his Handle

NewsblogAstros hope Yuli Gurriel can bring stability to first base - Houston Chronicle
(21 - 8:47pm, Feb 21)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

NewsblogIn a world without stats, who would be the best baseball player?
(61 - 7:35pm, Feb 21)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogHow baseball players are trying stem cells to avoid Tommy John
(7 - 6:53pm, Feb 21)
Last: David Nieporent (now, with children)

Newsblog5 reasons Matt Wieters would make the Nationals the NL East favorites | FOX Sports
(13 - 5:45pm, Feb 21)
Last: Golfing Great Mitch Cumstein

Page rendered in 0.1526 seconds
47 querie(s) executed