712731252A30202B263103242E222A2F6D20430 wrote: Does anyone besides me think the Players and Owners should get their act together, and settle this lockout ? We are probably about two weeks, before pitchers and catchers report to camp. When and if an agreement is reached, a Rule 5 Draft is needed, many Free Agent players remain unsigned, and players like Brian Reynolds still need to agree to a contract, or go to arbitration if that is still a provision under the new CBA. That is a lot to get done with a short window if ST is going to begin on time.
Yes I don't think they should just settle. Its time for the owners to stand their ground and just say no to the Union. [highlight]Unions are nothing but socialism[/highlight] in a capitalistic society. If they don't won't to play so be it. I would let them stay home and let people who want to play play. [highlight]The players like Mookie, Brice, Sherzer, Cole who make $35 million a year just can't work for $10 Million a year[/highlight] need a real reality check. To hell with everyone of these whining jerks.
Of course as some on here have correctly stated both sides are very happy with ripping off the working man while the elites enjoy there spoils. No matter what anyone on here says without the common man blowing 10% of their salary watching these spoiled brats they wouldn't be making these outrageous salaries. Until most of those making $50K to 100K stop attending these games will anything change. You see there are far fewer making $250K a year or more. It's all about the numbers. Baseball popularity will continue to decline if these elites continue abusing the common man.
There's a bit of inconsistency in your argument. You reject socialism when mentioning unions but then you want to restrict the amount of money a player can earn, which sure isn't capitalism.
Actually, pro sports probably work best if operated under socialistic guidelines. If all the franchises were required to spend the same amount of money on payroll it would at least even the playing field in that respect. Then it's up to the GM to build, the manager to lead, and the players to perform. But it would start out on equal footing instead of the way it is now.
I agree, but until we get rid of the free agency crap it's the only way I know of to limit these outrageous contracts. I would rather not have a cap, but free agency has given superstars the ability to blackmail teams which just gets passed on to the public. The judge who ruled on free agency dealt a destructive blow to MLB baseball.
The next CBA and the future of MLB
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
The next CBA and the future of MLB
293133343423323528293F5A0 wrote: People saying tickets are too expensive must be stuck in some time warp. There isn't a team in MLB that doesn't offer some fantastical discount for a game or more during the season. Just a lot of "back in the day" nonsense. If you want to attend a game cheaply do your due diligence. I'd bet that for every million people that complain about ticket prices, 999,000 wouldn't go if there were free tickets for a game. They'd just find some new excuse.
Modifying to add, if you need proof, span the views from every MLB teams games, and you will find that even in the best attended places, there are games with acres of empty seats. Monday-Thursday games in April and May have empty seats galore, and these are the times MLB teams offer exceptional discounts, or wait till August and September when your team is out of it.
I imagine someone is a financial expert and can place some sort of inflationary index on the price of tickets, from say about mid 70's. Stadiums have more to offer these days too. I used to pay $4 dollars for upper deck seats at TRS, but the lower yellow ones, and the ones behind home plate out to first and third base. I know pricing levels have changed even back then. But when my dad came back from Viet Nam in 1970, we went to a September game and sat in the upper deck in the outfield, and tickets were either $2 or $2.50. They also had a speed gun machine, where you would get a free ticket if you guessed your speed on the third throw, and they were $4 seats and this was 1976-77 time frame. The equivalent seats to those would the corner OF 300 level seats in the higher levels, or the deck seating at PNC. Those seats are showing $18 at PNC right now, however if you use Giant Eagle or some other discount providers (military, senior citizens, Giant Eagle, PNC park card holder, etc.) those same tickets are showing $11 for senior citizens, $9 for Giant Eagle advantage card holders.
If $9 is too much to attend a game, so be it. I'm guessing the $9 ticket is pretty near the same as those ticket prices from the 70's. And that's with free agency and all.
Well said from an Elite who could care less about this game as long as they can afford it. I believe it goes something like this. "Let them eat cake"
Nine dollars is elite?
What a load of crap there's no $9 tickets maybe after you buy 5 $200 tickets or a last minute sale 5 minutes before the game. Why would anyone deny ticket prices are ridiculous. The last ticket I had were $250 for 2 tickets.6 years ago. I didn't buy them they were given to me by a good friend. Folks who can afford $250 for tickets really prefer not having to have to be around smelly Walmart shoppers.
on the Pirate website there are plenty of tickets available in the $22-39 range. The $39 tickets are in Section 108 as an example. I found these doing a search for tickets on the April 2 game against the Cards.
https://mpv.tickets.com/?agency=MLB_MPV ... cher=false
Modifying to add, if you need proof, span the views from every MLB teams games, and you will find that even in the best attended places, there are games with acres of empty seats. Monday-Thursday games in April and May have empty seats galore, and these are the times MLB teams offer exceptional discounts, or wait till August and September when your team is out of it.
I imagine someone is a financial expert and can place some sort of inflationary index on the price of tickets, from say about mid 70's. Stadiums have more to offer these days too. I used to pay $4 dollars for upper deck seats at TRS, but the lower yellow ones, and the ones behind home plate out to first and third base. I know pricing levels have changed even back then. But when my dad came back from Viet Nam in 1970, we went to a September game and sat in the upper deck in the outfield, and tickets were either $2 or $2.50. They also had a speed gun machine, where you would get a free ticket if you guessed your speed on the third throw, and they were $4 seats and this was 1976-77 time frame. The equivalent seats to those would the corner OF 300 level seats in the higher levels, or the deck seating at PNC. Those seats are showing $18 at PNC right now, however if you use Giant Eagle or some other discount providers (military, senior citizens, Giant Eagle, PNC park card holder, etc.) those same tickets are showing $11 for senior citizens, $9 for Giant Eagle advantage card holders.
If $9 is too much to attend a game, so be it. I'm guessing the $9 ticket is pretty near the same as those ticket prices from the 70's. And that's with free agency and all.
Well said from an Elite who could care less about this game as long as they can afford it. I believe it goes something like this. "Let them eat cake"
Nine dollars is elite?
What a load of crap there's no $9 tickets maybe after you buy 5 $200 tickets or a last minute sale 5 minutes before the game. Why would anyone deny ticket prices are ridiculous. The last ticket I had were $250 for 2 tickets.6 years ago. I didn't buy them they were given to me by a good friend. Folks who can afford $250 for tickets really prefer not having to have to be around smelly Walmart shoppers.
on the Pirate website there are plenty of tickets available in the $22-39 range. The $39 tickets are in Section 108 as an example. I found these doing a search for tickets on the April 2 game against the Cards.
https://mpv.tickets.com/?agency=MLB_MPV ... cher=false
-
2drfischer@gmail.c
The next CBA and the future of MLB
3D252720203726213C3D2B4E0 wrote: Does anyone besides me think the Players and Owners should get their act together, and settle this lockout ? We are probably about two weeks, before pitchers and catchers report to camp. When and if an agreement is reached, a Rule 5 Draft is needed, many Free Agent players remain unsigned, and players like Brian Reynolds still need to agree to a contract, or go to arbitration if that is still a provision under the new CBA. That is a lot to get done with a short window if ST is going to begin on time.
Yes I don't think they should just settle. Its time for the owners to stand their ground and just say no to the Union. [highlight]Unions are nothing but socialism[/highlight] in a capitalistic society. If they don't won't to play so be it. I would let them stay home and let people who want to play play. [highlight]The players like Mookie, Brice, Sherzer, Cole who make $35 million a year just can't work for $10 Million a year[/highlight] need a real reality check. To hell with everyone of these whining jerks.
Of course as some on here have correctly stated both sides are very happy with ripping off the working man while the elites enjoy there spoils. No matter what anyone on here says without the common man blowing 10% of their salary watching these spoiled brats they wouldn't be making these outrageous salaries. Until most of those making $50K to 100K stop attending these games will anything change. You see there are far fewer making $250K a year or more. It's all about the numbers. Baseball popularity will continue to decline if these elites continue abusing the common man.
There's a bit of inconsistency in your argument. You reject socialism when mentioning unions but then you want to restrict the amount of money a player can earn, which sure isn't capitalism.
Actually, pro sports probably work best if operated under socialistic guidelines. If all the franchises were required to spend the same amount of money on payroll it would at least even the playing field in that respect. Then it's up to the GM to build, the manager to lead, and the players to perform. But it would start out on equal footing instead of the way it is now.
I agree, but until we get rid of the free agency crap it's the only way I know of to limit these outrageous contracts. I would rather not have a cap, but free agency has given superstars the ability to blackmail teams which just gets passed on to the public. The judge who ruled on free agency dealt a destructive blow to MLB baseball.
Other workers in other industries have the ability to move into other jobs and other industries (be free agents), and can negotiate for the highest wage they can get. The courts have agreed that baseball players have the same right, regardless of how much money they already make.
Baseball players have unique skills that people are willing to pay a lot of money to watch them use. In turn, those skills earn a lot of money for their employers, which allows the employers to pay them large wages. Because no one is willing to pay to watch us regular guys do our jobs, we don't bring in the large revenues to our employers that baseball players do for theirs. That's why we don't earn wages like ballplayers do, even if we do something far more essential.
That's how the labor market works in a free market like ours. It's not that superstars "blackmail" owners. The owners willingly pay those star's wages knowing they'll earn that money back in increased revenues, whether it comes from ticket sales, a new TV contract, or from social media.
For me, the answer is to require all teams to spend the same amount of dollars in wages. That forces the talent to move to where money is available and thus spreads out that talent. But I don't see either the owners or the players ever agreeing to such a system.
Yes I don't think they should just settle. Its time for the owners to stand their ground and just say no to the Union. [highlight]Unions are nothing but socialism[/highlight] in a capitalistic society. If they don't won't to play so be it. I would let them stay home and let people who want to play play. [highlight]The players like Mookie, Brice, Sherzer, Cole who make $35 million a year just can't work for $10 Million a year[/highlight] need a real reality check. To hell with everyone of these whining jerks.
Of course as some on here have correctly stated both sides are very happy with ripping off the working man while the elites enjoy there spoils. No matter what anyone on here says without the common man blowing 10% of their salary watching these spoiled brats they wouldn't be making these outrageous salaries. Until most of those making $50K to 100K stop attending these games will anything change. You see there are far fewer making $250K a year or more. It's all about the numbers. Baseball popularity will continue to decline if these elites continue abusing the common man.
There's a bit of inconsistency in your argument. You reject socialism when mentioning unions but then you want to restrict the amount of money a player can earn, which sure isn't capitalism.
Actually, pro sports probably work best if operated under socialistic guidelines. If all the franchises were required to spend the same amount of money on payroll it would at least even the playing field in that respect. Then it's up to the GM to build, the manager to lead, and the players to perform. But it would start out on equal footing instead of the way it is now.
I agree, but until we get rid of the free agency crap it's the only way I know of to limit these outrageous contracts. I would rather not have a cap, but free agency has given superstars the ability to blackmail teams which just gets passed on to the public. The judge who ruled on free agency dealt a destructive blow to MLB baseball.
Other workers in other industries have the ability to move into other jobs and other industries (be free agents), and can negotiate for the highest wage they can get. The courts have agreed that baseball players have the same right, regardless of how much money they already make.
Baseball players have unique skills that people are willing to pay a lot of money to watch them use. In turn, those skills earn a lot of money for their employers, which allows the employers to pay them large wages. Because no one is willing to pay to watch us regular guys do our jobs, we don't bring in the large revenues to our employers that baseball players do for theirs. That's why we don't earn wages like ballplayers do, even if we do something far more essential.
That's how the labor market works in a free market like ours. It's not that superstars "blackmail" owners. The owners willingly pay those star's wages knowing they'll earn that money back in increased revenues, whether it comes from ticket sales, a new TV contract, or from social media.
For me, the answer is to require all teams to spend the same amount of dollars in wages. That forces the talent to move to where money is available and thus spreads out that talent. But I don't see either the owners or the players ever agreeing to such a system.
-
skinnyhorse
- Posts: 926
- Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 1:19 am
The next CBA and the future of MLB
113736213727540 wrote: People saying tickets are too expensive must be stuck in some time warp. There isn't a team in MLB that doesn't offer some fantastical discount for a game or more during the season. Just a lot of "back in the day" nonsense. If you want to attend a game cheaply do your due diligence. I'd bet that for every million people that complain about ticket prices, 999,000 wouldn't go if there were free tickets for a game. They'd just find some new excuse.
Modifying to add, if you need proof, span the views from every MLB teams games, and you will find that even in the best attended places, there are games with acres of empty seats. Monday-Thursday games in April and May have empty seats galore, and these are the times MLB teams offer exceptional discounts, or wait till August and September when your team is out of it.
I imagine someone is a financial expert and can place some sort of inflationary index on the price of tickets, from say about mid 70's. Stadiums have more to offer these days too. I used to pay $4 dollars for upper deck seats at TRS, but the lower yellow ones, and the ones behind home plate out to first and third base. I know pricing levels have changed even back then. But when my dad came back from Viet Nam in 1970, we went to a September game and sat in the upper deck in the outfield, and tickets were either $2 or $2.50. They also had a speed gun machine, where you would get a free ticket if you guessed your speed on the third throw, and they were $4 seats and this was 1976-77 time frame. The equivalent seats to those would the corner OF 300 level seats in the higher levels, or the deck seating at PNC. Those seats are showing $18 at PNC right now, however if you use Giant Eagle or some other discount providers (military, senior citizens, Giant Eagle, PNC park card holder, etc.) those same tickets are showing $11 for senior citizens, $9 for Giant Eagle advantage card holders.
If $9 is too much to attend a game, so be it. I'm guessing the $9 ticket is pretty near the same as those ticket prices from the 70's. And that's with free agency and all.
Well said from an Elite who could care less about this game as long as they can afford it. I believe it goes something like this. "Let them eat cake"
Nine dollars is elite?
What a load of crap there's no $9 tickets maybe after you buy 5 $200 tickets or a last minute sale 5 minutes before the game. Why would anyone deny ticket prices are ridiculous. The last ticket I had were $250 for 2 tickets.6 years ago. I didn't buy them they were given to me by a good friend. Folks who can afford $250 for tickets really prefer not having to have to be around smelly Walmart shoppers.
on the Pirate website there are plenty of tickets available in the $22-39 range. The $39 tickets are in Section 108 as an example. I found these doing a search for tickets on the April 2 game against the Cards.
https://mpv.tickets.com/?agency=MLB_MPV ... cher=false
I'd love dugout seats and I'd be glad to give you $22 each, get me 4 on April 2. I'll send you the money when you mail me the tickets. I'll not hold my breath.
Modifying to add, if you need proof, span the views from every MLB teams games, and you will find that even in the best attended places, there are games with acres of empty seats. Monday-Thursday games in April and May have empty seats galore, and these are the times MLB teams offer exceptional discounts, or wait till August and September when your team is out of it.
I imagine someone is a financial expert and can place some sort of inflationary index on the price of tickets, from say about mid 70's. Stadiums have more to offer these days too. I used to pay $4 dollars for upper deck seats at TRS, but the lower yellow ones, and the ones behind home plate out to first and third base. I know pricing levels have changed even back then. But when my dad came back from Viet Nam in 1970, we went to a September game and sat in the upper deck in the outfield, and tickets were either $2 or $2.50. They also had a speed gun machine, where you would get a free ticket if you guessed your speed on the third throw, and they were $4 seats and this was 1976-77 time frame. The equivalent seats to those would the corner OF 300 level seats in the higher levels, or the deck seating at PNC. Those seats are showing $18 at PNC right now, however if you use Giant Eagle or some other discount providers (military, senior citizens, Giant Eagle, PNC park card holder, etc.) those same tickets are showing $11 for senior citizens, $9 for Giant Eagle advantage card holders.
If $9 is too much to attend a game, so be it. I'm guessing the $9 ticket is pretty near the same as those ticket prices from the 70's. And that's with free agency and all.
Well said from an Elite who could care less about this game as long as they can afford it. I believe it goes something like this. "Let them eat cake"
Nine dollars is elite?
What a load of crap there's no $9 tickets maybe after you buy 5 $200 tickets or a last minute sale 5 minutes before the game. Why would anyone deny ticket prices are ridiculous. The last ticket I had were $250 for 2 tickets.6 years ago. I didn't buy them they were given to me by a good friend. Folks who can afford $250 for tickets really prefer not having to have to be around smelly Walmart shoppers.
on the Pirate website there are plenty of tickets available in the $22-39 range. The $39 tickets are in Section 108 as an example. I found these doing a search for tickets on the April 2 game against the Cards.
https://mpv.tickets.com/?agency=MLB_MPV ... cher=false
I'd love dugout seats and I'd be glad to give you $22 each, get me 4 on April 2. I'll send you the money when you mail me the tickets. I'll not hold my breath.
The next CBA and the future of MLB
627A787F7F68797E636274110 wrote:
What a load of crap there's no $9 tickets maybe after you buy 5 $200 tickets or a last minute sale 5 minutes before the game. Why would anyone deny ticket prices are ridiculous. The last ticket I had were $250 for 2 tickets.6 years ago. I didn't buy them they were given to me by a good friend. Folks who can afford $250 for tickets really prefer not having to have to be around smelly Walmart shoppers.
Okay, you're clearly trolling, you obviously know you can see what I say is correct by going to the Pirates site, click on tickets, then click on the "fan values" tab to see that Giant Eagle advantage card holders can get seats for $9,senior citizens can get $11 dollar tickets, and gov x offers discounts also, however I felt it was redundant to log into my account to see what the prices are.
And if the price of tickets keeps people with your attitude out of the park, so be it. I'm done conversing with you
What a load of crap there's no $9 tickets maybe after you buy 5 $200 tickets or a last minute sale 5 minutes before the game. Why would anyone deny ticket prices are ridiculous. The last ticket I had were $250 for 2 tickets.6 years ago. I didn't buy them they were given to me by a good friend. Folks who can afford $250 for tickets really prefer not having to have to be around smelly Walmart shoppers.
Okay, you're clearly trolling, you obviously know you can see what I say is correct by going to the Pirates site, click on tickets, then click on the "fan values" tab to see that Giant Eagle advantage card holders can get seats for $9,senior citizens can get $11 dollar tickets, and gov x offers discounts also, however I felt it was redundant to log into my account to see what the prices are.
And if the price of tickets keeps people with your attitude out of the park, so be it. I'm done conversing with you
-
skinnyhorse
- Posts: 926
- Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 1:19 am
The next CBA and the future of MLB
75535441484453454D260 wrote:
What a load of crap there's no $9 tickets maybe after you buy 5 $200 tickets or a last minute sale 5 minutes before the game. Why would anyone deny ticket prices are ridiculous. The last ticket I had were $250 for 2 tickets.6 years ago. I didn't buy them they were given to me by a good friend. Folks who can afford $250 for tickets really prefer not having to have to be around smelly Walmart shoppers.
Okay, you're clearly trolling, you obviously know you can see what I say is correct by going to the Pirates site, click on tickets, then click on the "fan values" tab to see that Giant Eagle advantage card holders can get seats for $9,senior citizens can get $11 dollar tickets, and gov x offers discounts also, however I felt it was redundant to log into my account to see what the prices are.
And if the price of tickets keeps people with your attitude out of the park, so be it. I'm done conversing with you
I'd love dugout seats and I'd be glad to give you $9 each, get me 4 on April 2. I'll send you the money when you mail me the tickets. I'll not hold my breath.
Oh and if you don't want to debate just call people names and take your ball and go home.
Buy the way I don't think the Pirates have to many $35 Million superstars. I actually thank Bob for that if he listened to many posters on here no one could afford a ticket in Pittsburg but you and the rest of the elites.
What a load of crap there's no $9 tickets maybe after you buy 5 $200 tickets or a last minute sale 5 minutes before the game. Why would anyone deny ticket prices are ridiculous. The last ticket I had were $250 for 2 tickets.6 years ago. I didn't buy them they were given to me by a good friend. Folks who can afford $250 for tickets really prefer not having to have to be around smelly Walmart shoppers.
Okay, you're clearly trolling, you obviously know you can see what I say is correct by going to the Pirates site, click on tickets, then click on the "fan values" tab to see that Giant Eagle advantage card holders can get seats for $9,senior citizens can get $11 dollar tickets, and gov x offers discounts also, however I felt it was redundant to log into my account to see what the prices are.
And if the price of tickets keeps people with your attitude out of the park, so be it. I'm done conversing with you
I'd love dugout seats and I'd be glad to give you $9 each, get me 4 on April 2. I'll send you the money when you mail me the tickets. I'll not hold my breath.
Oh and if you don't want to debate just call people names and take your ball and go home.
Buy the way I don't think the Pirates have to many $35 Million superstars. I actually thank Bob for that if he listened to many posters on here no one could afford a ticket in Pittsburg but you and the rest of the elites.
-
GreenWeenie
- Posts: 4012
- Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2020 3:47 pm
The next CBA and the future of MLB
Says right here that you're an "elite" member, so that's probably chump change for you. 
It's "Pittsburgh". The "h" doesn't cost any extra.
It's "Pittsburgh". The "h" doesn't cost any extra.
-
skinnyhorse
- Posts: 926
- Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 1:19 am
The next CBA and the future of MLB
023720202B1220202B2C20450 wrote: Says right here that you're an "elite" member, so that's probably chump change for you.
It's "Pittsburgh". The "h" doesn't cost any extra.
Your so clever, but make no sense. Keep on denying the obvious, the free agency ruling has caused ticket prices to explode
It's "Pittsburgh". The "h" doesn't cost any extra.
Your so clever, but make no sense. Keep on denying the obvious, the free agency ruling has caused ticket prices to explode
-
GreenWeenie
- Posts: 4012
- Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2020 3:47 pm
The next CBA and the future of MLB
263E3C3B3B2C3D3A272630550 wrote: Says right here that you're an "elite" member, so that's probably chump change for you.
It's "Pittsburgh". The "h" doesn't cost any extra.
Your so clever, but make no sense. Keep on denying the obvious, the free agency ruling has caused ticket prices to explode
So what?
It's "Pittsburgh". The "h" doesn't cost any extra.
Your so clever, but make no sense. Keep on denying the obvious, the free agency ruling has caused ticket prices to explode
So what?
-
skinnyhorse
- Posts: 926
- Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 1:19 am
The next CBA and the future of MLB
114751454A50404B465163444E424A4F0D40230 wrote: Does anyone besides me think the Players and Owners should get their act together, and settle this lockout ? We are probably about two weeks, before pitchers and catchers report to camp. When and if an agreement is reached, a Rule 5 Draft is needed, many Free Agent players remain unsigned, and players like Brian Reynolds still need to agree to a contract, or go to arbitration if that is still a provision under the new CBA. That is a lot to get done with a short window if ST is going to begin on time.
Yes I don't think they should just settle. Its time for the owners to stand their ground and just say no to the Union. [highlight]Unions are nothing but socialism[/highlight] in a capitalistic society. If they don't won't to play so be it. I would let them stay home and let people who want to play play. [highlight]The players like Mookie, Brice, Sherzer, Cole who make $35 million a year just can't work for $10 Million a year[/highlight] need a real reality check. To hell with everyone of these whining jerks.
Of course as some on here have correctly stated both sides are very happy with ripping off the working man while the elites enjoy there spoils. No matter what anyone on here says without the common man blowing 10% of their salary watching these spoiled brats they wouldn't be making these outrageous salaries. Until most of those making $50K to 100K stop attending these games will anything change. You see there are far fewer making $250K a year or more. It's all about the numbers. Baseball popularity will continue to decline if these elites continue abusing the common man.
There's a bit of inconsistency in your argument. You reject socialism when mentioning unions but then you want to restrict the amount of money a player can earn, which sure isn't capitalism.
Actually, pro sports probably work best if operated under socialistic guidelines. If all the franchises were required to spend the same amount of money on payroll it would at least even the playing field in that respect. Then it's up to the GM to build, the manager to lead, and the players to perform. But it would start out on equal footing instead of the way it is now.
I agree, but until we get rid of the free agency crap it's the only way I know of to limit these outrageous contracts. I would rather not have a cap, but free agency has given superstars the ability to blackmail teams which just gets passed on to the public. The judge who ruled on free agency dealt a destructive blow to MLB baseball.
Other workers in other industries have the ability to move into other jobs and other industries (be free agents), and can negotiate for the highest wage they can get. The courts have agreed that baseball players have the same right, regardless of how much money they already make.
Baseball players have unique skills that people are willing to pay a lot of money to watch them use. In turn, those skills earn a lot of money for their employers, which allows the employers to pay them large wages. Because no one is willing to pay to watch us regular guys do our jobs, we don't bring in the large revenues to our employers that baseball players do for theirs. That's why we don't earn wages like ballplayers do, even if we do something far more essential.
That's how the labor market works in a free market like ours. It's not that superstars "blackmail" owners. The owners willingly pay those star's wages knowing they'll earn that money back in increased revenues, whether it comes from ticket sales, a new TV contract, or from social media.
For me, the answer is to require all teams to spend the same amount of dollars in wages. That forces the talent to move to where money is available and thus spreads out that talent. But I don't see either the owners or the players ever agreeing to such a system.
Comparing professional sports players to the common laborer is ridiculous. That’s like comparing a elephant to a ant.
Professional players are offered large contracts before they prove their worth. A common laborer is offered the going rate so the owner can pay him and still make money, the owner knows from past experience what it takes to produce a product the customer will buy. MLB owners take enormous risk when offering a player his original signing contract with no guarantee. Of course, they pass that on to the customer in the price of tickets. The only way I can see to lower these risks is to do away with free agency reducing the owner’s big gamble. That way they can sell the asset/player if someone else wants to pay the price. With free agency after 6 years’ service the owner loses everything unless he unloads the player. The new owners are taking much less a gamble than the original owner as he’s buying a somewhat know asset. Large market owners who have more elites because of their population and location they can charge as much as necessary to cover these astronomical contracts. All of the complicated calculations just add cost which is passed along to the customer.
Without free agency the players still have lots of value as they can attract many fans to come to a game thus, he can and should earn more than the less talented player. If he and the owner cannot agree the owner can shop the player for cash and other player or players. This was common place before the Curt Flood fiasco and baseball was the number one professional sport. It’s obvious this would put smaller market teams better able to compete and keep ticket prices in smaller market teams more affordable. The only one who might have to take a pay cut is the ultra-rich pampered superstar and who really feels sorry for a player whose making $35 million a year.
The CBA agreement is totally one sided with the players and the big market teams in total control. Small market teams should stand up and be counted. Either it needs to be more favorable to small market teams, they should pull out of the agreement and let the Yankee’s, Mets, Dodgers, Angels, Cubs, White Sox’s, play each other and see how that works for those owners and players. They would come to their senses quickly. That’s not going to happen because the greedy owners could care less about these small market communities and MLB. They will continue to offer their communities mediocre baseball and a training ground for these big market communities and pocket a million a year, which is chump change for the Yankees.
Yes I don't think they should just settle. Its time for the owners to stand their ground and just say no to the Union. [highlight]Unions are nothing but socialism[/highlight] in a capitalistic society. If they don't won't to play so be it. I would let them stay home and let people who want to play play. [highlight]The players like Mookie, Brice, Sherzer, Cole who make $35 million a year just can't work for $10 Million a year[/highlight] need a real reality check. To hell with everyone of these whining jerks.
Of course as some on here have correctly stated both sides are very happy with ripping off the working man while the elites enjoy there spoils. No matter what anyone on here says without the common man blowing 10% of their salary watching these spoiled brats they wouldn't be making these outrageous salaries. Until most of those making $50K to 100K stop attending these games will anything change. You see there are far fewer making $250K a year or more. It's all about the numbers. Baseball popularity will continue to decline if these elites continue abusing the common man.
There's a bit of inconsistency in your argument. You reject socialism when mentioning unions but then you want to restrict the amount of money a player can earn, which sure isn't capitalism.
Actually, pro sports probably work best if operated under socialistic guidelines. If all the franchises were required to spend the same amount of money on payroll it would at least even the playing field in that respect. Then it's up to the GM to build, the manager to lead, and the players to perform. But it would start out on equal footing instead of the way it is now.
I agree, but until we get rid of the free agency crap it's the only way I know of to limit these outrageous contracts. I would rather not have a cap, but free agency has given superstars the ability to blackmail teams which just gets passed on to the public. The judge who ruled on free agency dealt a destructive blow to MLB baseball.
Other workers in other industries have the ability to move into other jobs and other industries (be free agents), and can negotiate for the highest wage they can get. The courts have agreed that baseball players have the same right, regardless of how much money they already make.
Baseball players have unique skills that people are willing to pay a lot of money to watch them use. In turn, those skills earn a lot of money for their employers, which allows the employers to pay them large wages. Because no one is willing to pay to watch us regular guys do our jobs, we don't bring in the large revenues to our employers that baseball players do for theirs. That's why we don't earn wages like ballplayers do, even if we do something far more essential.
That's how the labor market works in a free market like ours. It's not that superstars "blackmail" owners. The owners willingly pay those star's wages knowing they'll earn that money back in increased revenues, whether it comes from ticket sales, a new TV contract, or from social media.
For me, the answer is to require all teams to spend the same amount of dollars in wages. That forces the talent to move to where money is available and thus spreads out that talent. But I don't see either the owners or the players ever agreeing to such a system.
Comparing professional sports players to the common laborer is ridiculous. That’s like comparing a elephant to a ant.
Professional players are offered large contracts before they prove their worth. A common laborer is offered the going rate so the owner can pay him and still make money, the owner knows from past experience what it takes to produce a product the customer will buy. MLB owners take enormous risk when offering a player his original signing contract with no guarantee. Of course, they pass that on to the customer in the price of tickets. The only way I can see to lower these risks is to do away with free agency reducing the owner’s big gamble. That way they can sell the asset/player if someone else wants to pay the price. With free agency after 6 years’ service the owner loses everything unless he unloads the player. The new owners are taking much less a gamble than the original owner as he’s buying a somewhat know asset. Large market owners who have more elites because of their population and location they can charge as much as necessary to cover these astronomical contracts. All of the complicated calculations just add cost which is passed along to the customer.
Without free agency the players still have lots of value as they can attract many fans to come to a game thus, he can and should earn more than the less talented player. If he and the owner cannot agree the owner can shop the player for cash and other player or players. This was common place before the Curt Flood fiasco and baseball was the number one professional sport. It’s obvious this would put smaller market teams better able to compete and keep ticket prices in smaller market teams more affordable. The only one who might have to take a pay cut is the ultra-rich pampered superstar and who really feels sorry for a player whose making $35 million a year.
The CBA agreement is totally one sided with the players and the big market teams in total control. Small market teams should stand up and be counted. Either it needs to be more favorable to small market teams, they should pull out of the agreement and let the Yankee’s, Mets, Dodgers, Angels, Cubs, White Sox’s, play each other and see how that works for those owners and players. They would come to their senses quickly. That’s not going to happen because the greedy owners could care less about these small market communities and MLB. They will continue to offer their communities mediocre baseball and a training ground for these big market communities and pocket a million a year, which is chump change for the Yankees.