Here’s the latest from Wrigleyville…
- Within the last year, at least one major Cubs creditor has suggested that the Ricketts family should sell all or part of the team due to ongoing financial concerns, Gordon Wittenmyer of the Chicago Sun-Times reports. The Ricketts family may be hamstrung by the debts taken on in their initial purchase of the team, Wittenmyer explains, and the ongoing legal battle with local rooftop owners over proposed upgrades to Wrigley Field could be a “red herring” in regards to the Cubs’ revenue issues, sources say.
- Commissioner Bud Selig told reporters (including Wittenmyer) that he isn’t worried about the Cubs’ lack of spending in recent years. “The fact of the matter is this [ownership] group is more than capable economically. I have no concerns about their economic viability,” Selig said.
- Right-hander C.J. Edwards, the Cubs’ top pitching prospect, will undergo an MRI on Friday to investigate the source of tightness in his right shoulder (Wittenmyer has the details). Edwards has posted a 1.81 ERA, 11.5 K/9 and 3.51 K/BB rate over 204 career minor league innings and was one of the key pieces of the trade package the Cubs received from the Rangers in exchange for Matt Garza last summer. The 22-year-old was cited as one of the game’s top prospects in preseason rankings from Baseball America (which rated Edwards 28th overall), MLB.com (40th) and ESPN’s Keith Law (67th).
Interesting information about the Cubs’ financial situation.
Hope nothing bad turns up for Edwards…
The team with the 2nd biggest revenue on all baseball complaining about money
The Cubs are in a huge market, so they could be able to spend $120-150 million payrolls.
They have a good farm system, but they are going to need free agent help when it comes to starting pitching.
With the way this season has started, theres only two words for what Edwards has coming and they go a little something like this…
Tommy John
Nothing like that Tommy John shoulder surgery.
Edit: For sarcasm.
Its shoulder tightness…
I was very interested to learn the level of taxes the Cubs are forced to pay. I had no idea they had to pay so much for Wrigley Field, such a high percent of ticket sales, et cetera. You would think a stadium celebrating its 100th birthday would have been paid off by now, but nope. They are paying as much for Wrigley as a lot of other teams do with their brand new parks, except without the increased revenue and a bad tv contract.
I’m curious about the cubs’ bad TV contract. They were way out in front of all these regional networks—getting national exposure for decades with their games televised on cable network WGN.
it has more to do with not having night games and losing out on prime advertising slots not so much the contract itself.
Comcast expires in 2019 and i believe WGN TV is renegotiated afer 2015. heres to hoping for Cubs Network by 2020
Ahhh I forget about the night games issue. I do miss the days of seeing the Cubs on national cable TV all the time, but now that I think of it all those memories are of day games.
If you can’t make money on the Cubs, you might not be good at bizness.
what is never mentioned and rarely discussed is the debt structure imposed onthe sale of the club by the previous owner, Sam Zell. Any ownership group would have the same restrictions the Ricketts` have now. Add to that the taxes the corrupt Chicago politicians levy on the club, restrictions by a former Mayor who was blatantly biased against the club, a special interest community group putting up road blocks much to the chagrin of fans and other neighbors, on top of the neccessity of fixing an aging structure without support of the tax payers while struggling with an arbitrily imposed historical status, it isno wonder these rumors surface.
in short this has nothing to do withThe Ricketts and has everything to do with previous owners, corrupt government and special interest groups who want to excessively profit from a product THAT IS NOT THEIRS.
Great insight. I think claiming that Wrigley Field has an ‘arbitrarily imposed historical status’ is a stretch though…baseball fans from all over the USA (and chicago citizens) agree the park is a historic landmark. It’s not like the city slapped landmark status on the ballpark for no reason…Wrigley is a national treasure according to many people.
I called it arbitrary becasue it is not the entire park, but rather select features of the park. THere is not doubt Wrigley needs to be saved and preserved but the City Counsel land marked parts of the park that, while iconic, are not original parts of the structure, and in doing so forced a stadium, already generations behind in amenities, etc., to be mired in red tape any time a simple change or upgrade is needed
Thanks calicub.
Maybe the Cubs would be better off in a new stadium in a Chicago suburb.
or just move to another city
I doubt Mr. Selig is going to pressure the Cub ownership, while that ownership continues to try (as other MLB teams have attempted and mostly succeeded) to get taxpayer subsidies for stadium construction and infrastructure. In the long run, MLB would benefit from a higher quality product, but I cannot recall a single instance in the Selig Era where that was a priority.
let’s get another mascot everyone hates, that’ll help right?
the issue I have with the ricketts’ is that they’re using profits to pay down their debt. where is the money they’re saying they wish they could have used to just buy the team outright? the ownership is basically letting the fans buy the team for them slowly while putting out a bad team for us to watch. this offseason will truly decide how serious ownership is about winning. there will be a few pitchers on the market worthy of big contracts, which will directly coincide with the trickling in of prospects. if they take another pass this offseason they will truly have a problem on their hands.
Sorry, but end of the day, the Cubs are a business, and if you are profitable (and privately held), you can choose to spend the money how you see fit, and if debt service is the way they want to go, that’s their choice. Now, our choice is to not buy their product, but this is the Cubs afterall – they will continue to sellout. Personally, I like their plan – build on a solid organizational foundation, rather than the free agent du jour. It’s sustainable and I’m patient (you kind of have to be, as a Cubs fan).
Deadspin had an article the other day of a Bloomberg and Business Daily report that had a list of all franchises in the 4 pro sports which ranked how smart spending they are for the past 5 years. What was accounted for was team payroll with league average payroll, average # of wins the past 5 seasons compared to league average wins (which in baseball is always 81), # of playoff wins, and # of championships won
122 professional franchises, the Cubs were Dead Last. (If interested the top baseball team was the Cardinals who were ranked 2nd overall among all the teams)
Chicago’s hockey team was ranked #1.
As long as the Cubs owners have Bud’s seal of approval, that’s good enough for me!