Here’s the latest from around the league:
- Commissioner Rob Manfred would prefer for the Athletics to remain in Oakland, writes Bill Shaiken of the LA Times. The A’s are currently waiting to learn if the NFL’s Oakland Raiders will remain in the city or move to Los Angeles. Manfried also suggested that public financing would be helpful. “We want to remain loyal to [small market fans], but those markets also have to participate in providing the kind of facilities necessary to keep a Major League Baseball team.
- Brewers third baseman Aramis Ramirez won’t let the club’s slow start affect his decision to retire, reports MLB.com’s Adam McCalvy. Milwaukee is quickly falling out of contention in the tough NL Central. Ramirez is off to a slow start, but you have to imagine he’ll be a trade candidate this summer. Assuming he’s dealt, he’ll have an opportunity to finish his career with a contender – it just probably won’t be the Brewers.
- The Twins remain among the teams interested in free agent reliever Rafael Soriano, tweets Darren Wolfson of 1500 ESPN. Wolfson believes the fit is much better with the Tigers and Blue Jays. While Minnesota could definitely use some relief reinforcements, the club doesn’t figure to contend this season. As such, they probably view Soriano as a piece they could trade at the deadline.
Manfred’s comment about the duty of the taxpayer to subsidize private enterprise irritates me. Where should they get the money? Close libraries? Schools? Cut back on cops or garbage collection? Or raise taxes on all residents so a percentage of them can enjoy this type of entertainment. I’ve been a baseball fan for more than fifty years, and I’m a realist and I get it, but this never sits right with me.
He’s saying that in order to support the team the town needs to cooperate and upgrade the facilities in place. He’s not indicating that those other things you mentioned have to take place. If they can’t sustain a MLB then the A’s will simply have to move.
Taxation and public services are a zero-sum game. Manfred is saying “give us more”. Of course he’s not going to tell them where to take it from, but take it from the citizens is the only option. I agree completely, the A’s will move if they can’t have their stadium. But let’s not call them anything different than what they are–taxpayer subsidizes that favor private enterprise over individual citizens.
Then the A’s move. There’s a much more professionally run operation across the bay that does fine, so maybe time for Charlie Finley’s mistake to be rectified.
Well maybe the taxpayer could support a new stadium if we didn’t have to pay so much every month for cable tv or other expenses
Plus the MLB is 100% responsible for keeping salaries artificially high because they are guaranteed! So, I hear you.
I agree 100%. The jobs that these stadiums create are almost universally low-wage and seasonal. The newer stadiums with all kinds of restaurants, bars, etc inside the stadium property have actually been shown to have a negative effect on surrounding businesses in the neighborhoods in which these stadiums are built.
When MLB starts profit-sharing with all the taxpayers who end up chipping in their money, then they should get municipal help.
Keeping the team in Oakland is beneficial to the city in that it brings in money, schools and libraries don’t.
I’d argue that an educated populace has a much bigger impact on the local economy than a baseball team.
By and large, new stadium construction has not shown to be a net positive for cities that do it. And the idea that schools and libraries don’t is demonstrably false. You need an educated population to attract a certain type of employer. And, a city that cannot offer basic services to its constituents suffers middle and upper class flight–people who can afford to move do, and that reduces the tax base.
But the money a stadium brings in never amounts to the outlay for building it. If you want to know why ticket prices are high that’s why. And what’s the argument? Close schools and libraries?
Agreed. As many studies have pointed out, taxpayer-funded ballparks are money losers for taxpayers. Always.
Come on, now. Manfred*.
Enough of public financing; fans buy tickets, buy obscenely overpriced Indonesian-made gear, buy cable TV packages. If Manfred wants a new stadium or major improvements that A’s ownership can’t afford, MLB can float bonds to be paid off by the industry and other owners. Enough welfare for deadbeat billionaires.
Since Manfred seems to be the only one wanting Oakland to stay in Oakland how about the league puts up the money for the stadium?
I wouldn’t mind seeing Soriano in the Tigers bullpen, but he better be taking a pay cut of substantial size.
Tigers are probably reluctant as they have failed with similar signings. Soriano looks like Nathan 2.0.
Got any better ideas? Soriano doesn’t cost prospects, which they don’t have to trade. On a one year deal, it would be low risk. Plus, he has done set-up before.
Why not just use the revenue sharing money to build new stadiums. Makes more sense then giving it to owners who use that money to run their team and keep the revenue their team makes for themselves.
Because the owners expect a town may blink and give corporate welfare.
Then MLB should come up with ways that it is beneficial to the cities to fund new stadiums. Maybe they should give the cities a cut of tickets and concession revenue to help offset the cost of building the stadium. That would never happen though.
It would make a ton of sense if MLB was run by a group interested in promoting the game.
There is one goal and it can be defined as short term profit.
Even though I would love to see the As stay in Oakland, I do not like the idea of taxpayer funded Corporate Welfare. Welfare should be used for the poor who genuinely need help and are motivated to get off it as soon as possible. It should not be for Billionaire owners and $100MM+ Players.
I’d like to know what absurd metrics are being used to call Oakland a “small market”. It’s part of one of the absolute wealthiest areas in the entire country, the Bay Area is the 5th largest metro area in the nation and there’s nothing small about Oakland’s market. At all. They have a cheapskate owner and a terrible stadium which both manage to drive revenue into the dirt because nobody wants to advertise at a terrible stadium, and the ownership sends out any player basically on a whim so the fans can’t even really get into the idea of having favorite players.
They’re not a small market. They’re a terrible ownership market. There’s an easy way to fix that, but MLB doesn’t want to ailenate any other billionaires by trying to tell them they need to maybe think of the fans before profits. The city doesn’t want to give a billionaire free money for a ballpark, since they’ve got other things to spend the money on. These super rich owners threatening to move a team they’ve run poorly since they got it are scum of the earth. They build their own misery from their actions. Nobody wants to support A’s ownership. The fans, the community, the local government, the local businesses. Nobody. Because the owners are terrible, only look after their profits at the expense of the fans in the 5th largest market (bigger than everyone but the NY, Chicago, LA and Washington/Baltimore teams!) while crying about small market this and that.
People would come to the games, pay SF money for it (they’re already paying SF prices for housing!), and everyone would make a lot more money if the owners would stop begging for handouts and just build something everyone wants to happen.
Can I give a few million votes?
The A’s want to move to San Jose/Silicon Valley
where the corporate sponsorships are
and where many of their fans are located.
Manfred should allow the A’s to move to San Jose
keeping them in the SF Bay Area.
Oakland is too small a market for an MLB baseball
team playing 81 home games
and needing revenues from corporate sponsorships and
and corporate boxes, advertising etc…
to keep their team competitive…
Baltimore isn’t a big market though, neither is Oakland. Oakland has to compete with about 5 other teams in California.
Manfred does not know the Bay Area market very well.
The A’s should be allowed to relocate to San Jose/Silicon Valley
in Santa Clara County/// still in the Bay Area
where the fans and corporate sponsorships are Silicon Valley.
The Giants are set with their new ballpark in San Francisco
so they have no leg to stand on to object to the A’s move
(especially since former A’s ownership helped save the Giants
for the SF Bay Area and stopped them from moving to
Tampa when the moving trucks were already loaded)…