Indians for sale ? Dan Gilbert ?

[e0y2e3]

The got ways to make more money without infringing too far into the big markets revenue sharing.

The players gave up barely a single additional thing over the last few months.

The small markets wanted more money and had to find a way to do so (combining the amped up luxury tax, which will hurt as many small markets as it helps... read Memphis, Portland, OKC with revenue sharing).

If the big markets had been willing to go all in on revenue sharing we also wouldn't have had a prolonged lockout.

They spread the money around a bit, just like the MLB.

[e0y2e3]

Of course, it's not like those six in the NBA actually got anything competitive or balanced achieved, they just got a bigger piece of the pie to go away.

Not going to argue with you about it, because you obviously are more in tune with it than I. But I would say, from an external point of view, they got a little something in the way of more balance. And they were starting from a much better place than baseball in terms of balance, so a small win counts. Short of a real hard cap or franchise tag...there wasn't a whole lot to shoot for.

And their big negotiating ploy re: competitive balance was to instill an NHL style system. The harped on this up until the final deal was signed then signed a deal with no real NHL style components.

It was a money deal, always is.

[pup]

Did they not get additional oppurtunity to retain their own free agents? Making the difference between max salaries wider than they previously were?

[peeker643]

Of course, it's not like those six in the NBA actually got anything competitive or balanced achieved, they just got a bigger piece of the pie to go away.

Not going to argue with you about it, because you obviously are more in tune with it than I. But I would say, from an external point of view, they got a little something in the way of more balance. And they were starting from a much better place than baseball in terms of balance, so a small win counts. Short of a real hard cap or franchise tag...there wasn't a whole lot to shoot for.

Was never about that. Was aways about a bit of blood and a lot of money. Always. And yeah, MLB owners can occasionally cry poor or bitch about the unfairness of the system, but it's always about the money there too.

Not sure why people think there's anything more than money EVER. If you're waiting for sports to be about something different I'm afraid you, your kids, their kids and their Kids' kids will die disappointed.

And if you ever doubt that it's about the money, it's about the money. Ego enters the equation but it's a distant second.

[e0y2e3]

All the keeping your own FA rules were somewhere between meh and negligable.

My point, EOD, you see these CBAs in every sport and every time they are about money and little else.

And the MLB is sitting like a king atop piles of money right now (which is mind-boggling since they have essentially lost all of generation Y as fans and much of X) so you got a CBA passed in about six minutes.

There wasn't even a small contingent of blood lusting owners like in the NBA (or a whole bunch of people wanting more money like the NFL).

I guess we could just have the Indians adopt the Miami Marlins model and bottom out salary wise for a decade, pocket the Yankees luxury tax money and then spend a bunch in ten years.

[Jumbo]

And the MLB is sitting like a king atop piles of money right now (which is mind-boggling since they have essentially lost all of generation Y as fans and much of X) so you got a CBA passed in about six minutes.

This a guess more than an argument, but I think you might be overstating things a bit. MLB, more than the other sports, makes its money through pure scale: with 162 games that's a lot of tickets to sell (at prices generally much lower than the other sports) and a lot of TV airtime to fill.

According to Wikipedia, last season total MLB attendance was about 73 million...a higher total attendance than the NBA, NHL, and NFL combined.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sports_attendance_figures#Top_Leagues_in_total_attendance

Again, attendance /= revenue, because of TV money, differing price structures, and so on...but I don't think it should be considered a major surprise that MLB makes a lot of money.

I guess we could just have the Indians adopt the Miami Marlins model and bottom out salary wise for a decade, pocket the Yankees luxury tax money and then spend a bunch in ten years.

A revenue sharing system that encourages failure (and punishes success) is, was, and always will be a mistake. That was obvious from Day 1 when the Indians were paying into revenue sharing in the late 90s. Revenue sharing should just seek to rebalance inherent market size (i.e., population size) advantages. The NFL is the only system that really does this well, but it has the advantage of getting a large fraction of its revenue from national TV money that can easily be shared.

But you're right: so long as the incentive exists to alternate between tanking, pocketing revenue sharing money, and then splurging When The Time Is Right(tm), that's what teams probably should do.

[e0y2e3]

And the MLB is sitting like a king atop piles of money right now (which is mind-boggling since they have essentially lost all of generation Y as fans and much of X) so you got a CBA passed in about six minutes.

This a guess more than an argument, but I think you might be overstating things a bit. MLB, more than the other sports, makes its money through pure scale: with 162 games that's a lot of tickets to sell (at prices generally much lower than the other sports) and a lot of TV airtime to fill.

According to Wikipedia, last season total MLB attendance was about 73 million...a higher total attendance than the NBA, NHL, and NFL combined.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sports_attendance_figures#Top_Leagues_in_total_attendance

Again, attendance /= revenue, because of TV money, differing price structures, and so on...but I don't think it should be considered a major surprise that MLB makes a lot of money.

I guess we could just have the Indians adopt the Miami Marlins model and bottom out salary wise for a decade, pocket the Yankees luxury tax money and then spend a bunch in ten years.

A revenue sharing system that encourages failure (and punishes success) is, was, and always will be a mistake. That was obvious from Day 1 when the Indians were paying into revenue sharing in the late 90s. Revenue sharing should just seek to rebalance inherent market size (i.e., population size) advantages. The NFL is the only system that really does this well, but it has the advantage of getting a large fraction of its revenue from national TV money that can easily be shared.

But you're right: so long as the incentive exists to alternate between tanking, pocketing revenue sharing money, and then splurging When The Time Is Right(tm), that's what teams probably should do.

NFL also shares something like 33% of ticket money. It's pure communism.

[WiscTribeFan]

NFL also shares something like 33% of ticket money. It's pure communism.

Which allows little towns like Green Bay, Wisconsin to field a team, one that competes nearly every season.

[e0y2e3]

Oh for fucks sake, you can have your bullshit NFL parity crap comes from thinks like sharing ticket revenue with visitors!!!!!

The sharing ticket money is because a long time ago everyone decided to share everything during one argumentative CBA debate or another. The little poor Green Bay Packers would be fine if they only got a cut from the National TV deals.

And the Green Bay Packers compete when they have an elite QB and don't when they don't.

[WiscTribeFan]

Oh for fucks sake, you can have your bullshit NFL parity crap comes from thinks like sharing ticket revenue with visitors!!!!!

The sharing ticket money is because a long time ago everyone decided to share everything during one argumentative CBA debate or another. The little poor Green Bay Packers would be fine if they only got a cut from the National TV deals.

And the Green Bay Packers compete when they have an elite QB and don't when they don't.

If the NFL had a system like MLB does, Green Bay wouldn't have a baseball team, at least not a winning one. It's got a population 20K more than Parma.

Also, why don't you try not coming off like a total dick once in a while. Really. Give it a shot. I know it's your thing, but it must be tiring.

[Jumbo]

The sharing ticket money is because a long time ago everyone decided to share everything during one argumentative CBA debate or another. The little poor Green Bay Packers would be fine if they only got a cut from the National TV deals.

Exactly - it's the nationalization of the TV revenue, something that's unique to the NFL (and will remain so) that's at the heart of the issue. The sharing of ticket revenue is a smaller part of it, but even if teams didn't share that ticket revenue the TV contract would take care of it.

Also, of course, because of the limited number of games, there's not a huge variation in attendance among the franchises anyway.

[Jumbo]

If the NFL had a system like MLB does, Green Bay wouldn't have a baseball team, at least not a winning one. It's got a population 20K more than Parma.

...and Green Bay sold 560,000 tickets last year. And had the 11th highest attendance in the NFL.

Of course Green Bay wouldn't field an MLB team. Just like they wouldn't field an NHL or NBA team. Because those other sports don't have the national TV revenue to dole out like the NFL does.

[skatingtripods]

Was trying to find the net worth of Henry L. Meyer, former CEO of Keybank. Also has a director position with United/Continental. 61 years old. Plenty of stock holdings. Not sure if he'd even be interested in being part of a group to buy the team, but Key has so many things going on with the offices in Brooklyn, Key Tower, and then he's on the board for University Hospitals and the United Way of Cleveland. Couldn't find his net worth, just his year-by-year CEO compensation, which was always in the top 400.

Was a shot in the dark. Have no idea what other Cleveland businessmen would be interested. I would think it'd have to be somebody with a personal attachment to the team because they're not a money making endeavor.

[e0y2e3]

Was trying to find the net worth of Henry L. Meyer, former CEO of Keybank. Also has a director position with United/Continental. 61 years old. Plenty of stock holdings. Not sure if he'd even be interested in being part of a group to buy the team, but Key has so many things going on with the offices in Brooklyn, Key Tower, and then he's on the board for University Hospitals and the United Way of Cleveland. Couldn't find his net worth, just his year-by-year CEO compensation, which was always in the top 400.

Was a shot in the dark. Have no idea what other Cleveland businessmen would be interested. I would think it'd have to be somebody with a personal attachment to the team because they're not a money making endeavor.

You really, really, really want someone on the Forbes list to buy the team.

Even if they aren't (or barely are like Gilbert was back in the day), you then want them to be trending upward sharply.

I agree it would have to be someone with a deep personal interest because Cleveland, well, industry titans aren't a plenty.

But I'd start going down the Forbes list and figure it out from there.

BTW: exactly Jumbo, the NFL strat-o-gy is creating a national product and selling it as such. The small tidbits like the visotor getting ticket cuts cost Green Bay more money than it made 'em and are honestly small pieces of nothing that were a fake concession by one side or another during CBA negotiations. Hell, the players may have demanded it to make revenue sharing more transparent, who knows....

And it's not like the NFL is running out to expand to the Des Moines. Green Bay exists where and as it does due to history and the town established ownership keeping it alive and loved until the NFL became "NATIONAL SUPER TITAN LEAGUE!!!!"

Even with all of the revenue sharing and what not you're going to seek Jacksonville lose their team very soon.

[e0y2e3]

And, IMO, if Dolan hadn't overpaid out his face he could have made some solid money off the Indians for the last decade.

The real interesting aspect of a sale is where market valuation v. Dolan Perception falls re: the price.

[skatingtripods]

You really, really, really want someone on the Forbes list to buy the team.

Even if they aren't (or barely are like Gilbert was back in the day), you then want them to be trending upward sharply.

I agree it would have to be someone with a deep personal interest because Cleveland, well, industry titans aren't a plenty.

But I'd start going down the Forbes list and figure it out from there.

Only ones from Ohio were the Lerners, Leslie Wexner (3.2B) (retail stores under the Limited brand, lives in Dayton), and Clayton Mathile (1.8B) (Iams pet food and now in the high tech industry, lives in Brookfield, OH). Both of those guys are over 70.

If Terry Pegula, who recently bought the Buffalo Sabres, had an attachment to Cleveland, that might be an option. He's worth 3B. Big donor to Penn State.

[e0y2e3]

Maybe Bernie can put together a collection of investors led by Gilbert!!!

[peeker643]

Maybe Bernie can put together a collection of investors led by Gilbert!!!

His girlfriend is better connected and more relevant than Bernie is.

Last I saw she was selling a 57,000 sq foot, 200 acre estate somewhere near Columbus for $15million. I'd go to her and then Bernie if she says, "No".

[Jumbo]

And, IMO, if Dolan hadn't overpaid out his face he could have made some solid money off the Indians for the last decade.

The real interesting aspect of a sale is where market valuation v. Dolan Perception falls re: the price.

Last years Forbes has them with a value of $353M, a decade after the Dolan purchase at $323M. My guess is that the Forbes value is roughly accurate. The wild card is the valuation of STO...I suppose that these regional sports networks must be printing money, because teams with them seem to command premiums of a few hundred million dollars. The Astros were just sold for $680M (with a $70M credit from MLB for agreeing to swtich league), which includes a share of a regional sports network. The Dodgers are going well over a billion.

If Dolan hadn't overpaid by, say, $50M (which I think was about the amount to buyback the stock that Jacobs sold), his investment would probably be looking pretty good right now.

[Cerebral_DownTime]

Les Wexner ain't buying any sports team. he's still a billionaire made by an clothing store that hasn't been relevant since 1989.

He would spend money though..... like a drunk sailor on leave in Thailand.

[FUDU]

Since 1966, the year in which the Super Bowl started.

MLB: 20 different WS winners. 7 being the most won by any franchise with 2 other franchises winning 4, and all the rest winning between 3 and 1.

NFL: 17 different SB winners. 6 being the most won by any franchise with 2 other franchises winning 5 another winning 4 and all the rest winning between 3 and 1.

NBA: 14 different title winners. 11 being the most won by any franchise, with the next 4 franchise totals being 9,6,4 and 3. Everyone else won 1 or 2.

Which league is the parity league again?

BTW this thread is God awful.

[Cerebral_DownTime]

STFUDU.