Pirate goals

[ECBucs]

Here is another post about Nats but thought it was interesting because of this paragraph on how Nats ownership would need to change its goals:

But Nationals ownership would need to fundamentally change the way it has behaved since taking over the team. It would need to be a steward that cares primarily about its long-term investment and spends from its enormous cash reserves, packs the park with fans and hopes to break even or, maybe, turn a small profit annually as the overall value of the franchise rises. That’s a very different motivation from yearly profit sheets.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/nationals-journal/post/for-the-nationals-prince-fielder-or-ryan-zimmerman-is-only-a-choice-if-they-make-it-one/2012/01/04/gIQAo0KlcP_blog.html


It seems to me that NH and FC have basically said that is the Pirates plan to build an organization that can contend year after year.  NH just hasn't been able to get Bucs in position to demonstrate that yet.

[RJReynolds]

Here is another post about Nats but thought it was interesting because of this paragraph on how Nats ownership would need to change its goals:

But Nationals ownership would need to fundamentally change the way it has behaved since taking over the team. It would need to be a steward that cares primarily about its long-term investment and spends from its enormous cash reserves, packs the park with fans and hopes to break even or, maybe, turn a small profit annually as the overall value of the franchise rises. That’s a very different motivation from yearly profit sheets.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/nationals-journal/post/for-the-nationals-prince-fielder-or-ryan-zimmerman-is-only-a-choice-if-they-make-it-one/2012/01/04/gIQAo0KlcP_blog.html


It seems to me that NH and FC have basically said that is the Pirates plan to build an organization that can contend year after year.  NH just hasn't been able to get Bucs in position to demonstrate that yet.

This is where Mr. Nutting stops listening, sticks his fingers in his ears and starts saying "LA LA LA LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU LA LA LA LA LA".

RJR

[gamecckfn]

Here is another post about Nats but thought it was interesting because of this paragraph on how Nats ownership would need to change its goals:

But Nationals ownership would need to fundamentally change the way it has behaved since taking over the team. It would need to be a steward that cares primarily about its long-term investment and spends from its enormous cash reserves, packs the park with fans and hopes to break even or, maybe, turn a small profit annually as the overall value of the franchise rises. That’s a very different motivation from yearly profit sheets.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/nationals-journal/post/for-the-nationals-prince-fielder-or-ryan-zimmerman-is-only-a-choice-if-they-make-it-one/2012/01/04/gIQAo0KlcP_blog.html


It seems to me that NH and FC have basically said that is the Pirates plan to build an organization that can contend year after year.  NH just hasn't been able to get Bucs in position to demonstrate that yet.

This is where Mr. Nutting stops listening, sticks his fingers in his ears and starts saying "LA LA LA LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU LA LA LA LA LA".

RJR

Probably because they do not have enormous cash reserves.

[RJReynolds]

Right.

More likely because he is looking to get more than "break even or, maybe, turn a small profit annually as the overall value of the franchise rises. That's a very different motivation from yearly profit sheets." out of the Pirates on an annual basis.

If the goal of the Pirates is to make solid annual profits, they are doing a commendable job. If the goal is to win baseball games...not so much. The yearly profit sheets, which this article seems to be saying should not be of great concern, certainly seems to be at the top of our owners' list of concerns.

RJR

[gorillagogo]

Right.

More likely because he is looking to get more than "break even or, maybe, turn a small profit annually as the overall value of the franchise rises. That's a very different motivation from yearly profit sheets." out of the Pirates on an annual basis.

If the goal of the Pirates is to make solid annual profits, they are doing a commendable job. If the goal is to win baseball games...not so much. The yearly profit sheets, which this article seems to be saying should not be of great concern, certainly seems to be at the top of our owners' list of concerns.

RJR

Right. It would be much better if the team took on way too much debt again like they did under McClatchy. Now that's the way to run a baseball team!

[gamecckfn]

Right.

More likely because he is looking to get more than "break even or, maybe, turn a small profit annually as the overall value of the franchise rises. That's a very different motivation from yearly profit sheets." out of the Pirates on an annual basis.

If the goal of the Pirates is to make solid annual profits, they are doing a commendable job. If the goal is to win baseball games...not so much. The yearly profit sheets, which this article seems to be saying should not be of great concern, certainly seems to be at the top of our owners' list of concerns.

RJR

The goal is to not lose money, which they just started doing.  Making a profit is a good thing, they can pay down debt that way.  Many teams have almost no debt.  I imagine the Nationals are one of them with their owner being much wealthier and the city much larger. 

What is with the recent comps to the Nats anyways?  Not really similar to the Pirates at all.

[VaPirate]

Right.

More likely because he is looking to get more than "break even or, maybe, turn a small profit annually as the overall value of the franchise rises. That's a very different motivation from yearly profit sheets." out of the Pirates on an annual basis.

If the goal of the Pirates is to make solid annual profits, they are doing a commendable job. If the goal is to win baseball games...not so much. The yearly profit sheets, which this article seems to be saying should not be of great concern, certainly seems to be at the top of our owners' list of concerns.

RJR

Did you even read the article?  It's pushing Lerner to spend some of the banked money the Nats have generated.

And did you note this little tidbit: "With all the disposable income in the DMV area, a coming bump in television revenue and the Lerner’s billionaire wealth, Washington can be that kind of market."

Please tell us what exactly Lerner and Nutting have in common other than owning a MLB team?

[ECBucs]

Since I live in Northern Va I read about the Nats.

There are some similarities in that the Nats were a laughing stock team and have now worked them selves into a decent team.

Which teams would you consider comparable?  I'd say are Tampa, Marlins and A's and Reds.

[RJReynolds]

Right.

More likely because he is looking to get more than "break even or, maybe, turn a small profit annually as the overall value of the franchise rises. That's a very different motivation from yearly profit sheets." out of the Pirates on an annual basis.

If the goal of the Pirates is to make solid annual profits, they are doing a commendable job. If the goal is to win baseball games...not so much. The yearly profit sheets, which this article seems to be saying should not be of great concern, certainly seems to be at the top of our owners' list of concerns.

RJR

Right. It would be much better if the team took on way too much debt again like they did under McClatchy. Now that's the way to run a baseball team!

Wrong.

Not what the quote from the article says in the least. The quote states that the owner should be ok with the team breaking even or turning a small profit while the overall value of the team increases. It says nothing about running massive deficits. Solid attempt at a goal post move on behalf of ownership however.

As a businessman, I applaud the owners for being able to turn a pretty large annual profit year after year. As a fan I would rather see a better product on the field and investmet from ownership to the point of "break even" profit and loss statements. I pine for the day that ownership commits to such a "break even" philosophy. But it continues to be pushed back to some nebulous point some time in the future. Maybe.

Shoes

[RJReynolds]

Right.

More likely because he is looking to get more than "break even or, maybe, turn a small profit annually as the overall value of the franchise rises. That's a very different motivation from yearly profit sheets." out of the Pirates on an annual basis.

If the goal of the Pirates is to make solid annual profits, they are doing a commendable job. If the goal is to win baseball games...not so much. The yearly profit sheets, which this article seems to be saying should not be of great concern, certainly seems to be at the top of our owners' list of concerns.

RJR

Did you even read the article?  It's pushing Lerner to spend some of the banked money the Nats have generated.

And did you note this little tidbit: "With all the disposable income in the DMV area, a coming bump in television revenue and the Lerner’s billionaire wealth, Washington can be that kind of market."

Please tell us what exactly Lerner and Nutting have in common other than owning a MLB team?

The quote is what I find interesting. I agree what that particular quote with regard to Pirates ownership. I'm not comparing the Pirates ownership to the Nats and I do not care a bit what some writer for the Nats has to say overall. I simply find that quote very telling in regard to what an owner in MLB should be interested in, which is the long term appreciation of the asset, instead of the short term annual gain on the profit sheets.

RJR

[ECBucs]

Right.

More likely because he is looking to get more than "break even or, maybe, turn a small profit annually as the overall value of the franchise rises. That's a very different motivation from yearly profit sheets." out of the Pirates on an annual basis.

If the goal of the Pirates is to make solid annual profits, they are doing a commendable job. If the goal is to win baseball games...not so much. The yearly profit sheets, which this article seems to be saying should not be of great concern, certainly seems to be at the top of our owners' list of concerns.

RJR

Did you even read the article?  It's pushing Lerner to spend some of the banked money the Nats have generated.

And did you note this little tidbit: "With all the disposable income in the DMV area, a coming bump in television revenue and the Lerner’s billionaire wealth, Washington can be that kind of market."

Please tell us what exactly Lerner and Nutting have in common other than owning a MLB team?

This is pretty interesting in that a lot of people didn't think a baseball team could be successful in Washington. There is a lot of disposal income here but there is competition for it too as well as high cost of living.

Part of the bump in TV revenue is that Angelos had gotten an unfair deal to not oppose having the team in DC.  How much more local TV revenue are the Nats getting than Bucs

The article is saying if the owner just wants to break even they have the resources to pay for a good team, even with high salaried players like Werth, Fielder, Zimmerman and others.  The ability to make a profit would come from the appreciation of the team not from yearly profits.  It seems like the Pirates do not want to sacrifice the yearly profits.  My understanding is that the Bucs are paying down the debt and generating yearly profits.  Not that profits are going to paying down the debt.

[RJReynolds]

That's pretty much the point I am trying to make. The ownership is too concerned with the short term goal of annual profits versus the longer term goal of asset appreciation. They are trying to do both...perhaps successfully. I would argue however that some component of the value of the asset would be tied to on field success of the team...and in that respect their short term focus is at the expense of a larger long term value.

RJR

[VaPirate]

Right.

More likely because he is looking to get more than "break even or, maybe, turn a small profit annually as the overall value of the franchise rises. That's a very different motivation from yearly profit sheets." out of the Pirates on an annual basis.

If the goal of the Pirates is to make solid annual profits, they are doing a commendable job. If the goal is to win baseball games...not so much. The yearly profit sheets, which this article seems to be saying should not be of great concern, certainly seems to be at the top of our owners' list of concerns.

RJR

Did you even read the article?  It's pushing Lerner to spend some of the banked money the Nats have generated.

And did you note this little tidbit: "With all the disposable income in the DMV area, a coming bump in television revenue and the Lerner’s billionaire wealth, Washington can be that kind of market."

Please tell us what exactly Lerner and Nutting have in common other than owning a MLB team?

The quote is what I find interesting. I agree what that particular quote with regard to Pirates ownership. I'm not comparing the Pirates ownership to the Nats and I do not care a bit what some writer for the Nats has to say overall. I simply find that quote very telling in regard to what an owner in MLB should be interested in, which is the long term appreciation of the asset, instead of the short term annual gain on the profit sheets.

RJR

Well, then running the team as a viable business would be the most prudent way to guarantee long term appreciation.  The article is bascially saying "ditch prudent business practices, spend some of you money!!"  I'm thinking of Lerner being compared to Scrooge McDuck diving into some of his billions in one of his money bins.  Lerner could spend foolishly (heck he already has with the horrible Werth K) and I guess it won't hurt him one bit.  Not true for Nutting.

Now if you want to complain that we don't have a billionaire owner in one of the largest and wealthiest mkts in the country you can do that and maybe have a point, but I don't think you have a point in telling Nutting to spend money he doesn't have.

[RJReynolds]

Right.

More likely because he is looking to get more than "break even or, maybe, turn a small profit annually as the overall value of the franchise rises. That's a very different motivation from yearly profit sheets." out of the Pirates on an annual basis.

If the goal of the Pirates is to make solid annual profits, they are doing a commendable job. If the goal is to win baseball games...not so much. The yearly profit sheets, which this article seems to be saying should not be of great concern, certainly seems to be at the top of our owners' list of concerns.

RJR

Did you even read the article?  It's pushing Lerner to spend some of the banked money the Nats have generated.

And did you note this little tidbit: "With all the disposable income in the DMV area, a coming bump in television revenue and the Lerner’s billionaire wealth, Washington can be that kind of market."

Please tell us what exactly Lerner and Nutting have in common other than owning a MLB team?

The quote is what I find interesting. I agree what that particular quote with regard to Pirates ownership. I'm not comparing the Pirates ownership to the Nats and I do not care a bit what some writer for the Nats has to say overall. I simply find that quote very telling in regard to what an owner in MLB should be interested in, which is the long term appreciation of the asset, instead of the short term annual gain on the profit sheets.

RJR

Well, then running the team as a viable business would be the most prudent way to guarantee long term appreciation.  The article is bascially saying "ditch prudent business practices, spend some of you money!!"  I'm thinking of Lerner being compared to Scrooge McDuck diving into some of his billions in one of his money bins.  Lerner could spend foolishly (heck he already has with the horrible Werth K) and I guess it won't hurt him one bit.  Not true for Nutting.

Now if you want to complain that we don't have a billionaire owner in one of the largest and wealthiest mkts in the country you can do that and maybe have a point, but I don't think you have a point in telling Nutting to spend money he doesn't have.

How about the $30 mil in annual profits? I guess it would be imprudent of me to suggest that is my point rather than a stack of cash in a vault ala Jack Benny's basement.

RJR

[gorillagogo]

Right.

More likely because he is looking to get more than "break even or, maybe, turn a small profit annually as the overall value of the franchise rises. That's a very different motivation from yearly profit sheets." out of the Pirates on an annual basis.

If the goal of the Pirates is to make solid annual profits, they are doing a commendable job. If the goal is to win baseball games...not so much. The yearly profit sheets, which this article seems to be saying should not be of great concern, certainly seems to be at the top of our owners' list of concerns.

RJR

Right. It would be much better if the team took on way too much debt again like they did under McClatchy. Now that's the way to run a baseball team!

Wrong.

Not what the quote from the article says in the least. The quote states that the owner should be ok with the team breaking even or turning a small profit while the overall value of the team increases. It says nothing about running massive deficits. Solid attempt at a goal post move on behalf of ownership however.

As a businessman, I applaud the owners for being able to turn a pretty large annual profit year after year. As a fan I would rather see a better product on the field and investmet from ownership to the point of "break even" profit and loss statements. I pine for the day that ownership commits to such a "break even" philosophy. But it continues to be pushed back to some nebulous point some time in the future. Maybe.

Shoes

Please. The Nationals payroll has crept up from $60M in 2009 to $66M in 2010 to $68M in 2011, and this article is saying the team can afford a $145M payroll while simultaneously pointing to Lerner's billionaire wealth. Their new TV deal isn't worth $70M more per year, so I don't know how the team doubles its payroll without taking on new debt.