May 20: The league is aiming to formally present the union with an economic plan by this Friday, USA Today’s Bob Nightengale reports.
May 19: As Major League Baseball and the MLB Players Association continue their standoff over player compensation in a shortened 2020 season without fans in attendance, it seems neither side is prepared to budge. MLB Network’s Jon Heyman tweets that some with the league believe they “have it cold in emails” from late March that the previously agreed-upon prorated salary arrangement was contingent on fans being in attendance. The MLBPA, of course, has contested that the standing agreement sufficiently addresses that scenario (i.e. that the players are entitled to prorated salaries even in a spectator-free setting).
Joel Sherman of the New York Post has obtained the email in question, which was sent from MLB senior vice president of labor relations/deputy general counsel Patrick Houlihan to deputy commissioner Dan Halem. Within the email, Houlihan details a conversation he had with MLBPA deputy general counsel Matt Nussbaum on the morning of March 26:
Matt asked what ‘economic feasibility’ meant in Section I. I told him it meant that we would only consider playing in neutral sites or without fans if it worked for us economically. I reminded him of [commissioner Rob Manfred]’s comments at the outset that playing in empty stadiums did not work for us economically. But I said, for example, that we might be willing to have a conversation about playing some limited number of games in empty stadiums if players agreed to reduce their daily salaries for those games, and if it was part of a larger plan that made economic sense. Matt confirmed that that is what he thought we meant, but appreciated the confirmation.
Of course, it can’t be gleaned from that email just how clearly and accurately the league’s stance was laid out by Houlihan, nor is there any direct quote or confirmation of that understanding from an MLBPA official. We also don’t know whether any additional discussions or negotiations surrounding the issue took place between that conversation and the actual ratification of the agreement. While this email certainly indicates that the two sides discussed the matter, its status as a true “smoking gun” is up for interpretation.
The league will surely seek to use this as ammunition to argue that the MLBPA represented a belief that spectator-less games would need to be accounted for in a separate negotiation. The MLBPA took a similar approach recently when agent Scott Boras ardently stated that ownership “represented during that negotiation that they could operate without fans in the ballpark,” ultimately declaring that there will be no renegotiation of the standing agreement.
Late last week, commissioner Manfred suggested that owners were facing a collective loss of as much as four billion dollars — a grim portrayal which the league argues as the driving factor in its reported proposal for a revenue-sharing plan with the players. However, Travis Sawchik of FiveThirtyEight reports that the players are of the belief that, based on what ownership has presented, they’d benefit from a season of prorated player pay much more than by simply canceling the season (Twitter thread). The league’s revenue projections, for instance, did not account for the expanded playoff format that has been suggested but not yet formally proposed, according to Sawchik. If that’s the case, the players likely feel they still have leverage.
To that end, MLBPA senior director of collective bargaining Bruce Meyer tells Sherman: “the contract itself is very clear that in the event of a partial season players will get paid pro rata salary — whether with fans or without.”
That much seems debatable based on the portions of the agreement that have been made public, but the MLBPA nonetheless appears set to stand firm on that assertion. Meyer also confirms multiple reports that the league has yet to formally propose a salary scale (presumably due to the union’s refusal to even consider the 50-50 revenue share that was reported last week).
“Rather than actually negotiating over these issues the league is focusing on leaking self-serving internal memos to the media,” Meyer tells Sherman. He goes on to add that the league has yet to provide the Players Association with any documentation to support that their revenue losses would actually align with the extent of their claims.
It’s frankly baffling that things have reached this point. The two sides swiftly worked out an agreement not two weeks after the league was shut down due to the COVID-19 pandemic, but the document produced by those negotiations inexplicably failed to address this very scenario in a decisive manner that left no room for other interpretation. The implementation of a prorated pay scale in a shortened season seemed straightforward, but a later clause stating that the two sides will “discuss in good faith the economic feasibility of playing games in the absence of spectators” has proven nebulous enough to bring about the current stalemate.
The optics of a billionaires-versus-millionaires standoff is always cringe-worthy but is particularly egregious at a time when so much of the country has been laid off or furloughed. As both sides squabble over enormous sums of money, many in the general public look on with frustration and resentment.
It’s understandable that the players feel they’ve already made concessions and have now had the aforementioned “good faith” violated by the league’s call for additional cuts, but it’s also confounding that first iteration of their agreement left the door open for this publicly unfolding drama. It’s not as though playing games without fans in attendance was a radical concept at the time of the agreement; it had been a heavily speculated-upon possibility. The fact that it wasn’t expressly accounted for is a staggering omission.
If both sides are indeed drawing a hard line and are entirely averse to renegotiated terms, it stands to reason that the eventual outcome could be litigation. At that point, an arbitrator would need to consider the language within the original agreement and the alleged representations made by the league, weighing those against the purported email proof and any other evidence ownership wished to present.
As time keeps ticking. We are headed into late May already. With the ‘Spring training’ that will be required, this has to be solved sooner than later if there is to be a season.
they need an arbitor for this one
They can always lock out the players, even cancel the season if enough owners figure having to pay the pro rated amount will cost more than it’s worth, then not pay one dime in salaries until 2021 season starts, or MLBPA wises up.and learns who bares responsibility for the health of the league now and in the future.
i’d suggest many ballplayers start saving nickels, which doubt many do.
Canceling the season seems like the easiest solution (though I hope they don’t do it) . The players must know that if the easiest solution is also the most financially palatable, that’s what they going to do.
From the standpoint of the players, I’m not sure they have a lot of leverage. Maybe it is better to take a hit here, get your service time, and secure some good financial info for the next round of collective bargaining negotiations. Of course, if any players want to sit out due to health concerns – they should do it.
MLB players are ready to sit the season out. They already agreed to a pro-rated salary based off of numbers of games played. They know that if there are zero games played, they don’t make a dime. The owners really don’t have any leverage here as much as they’re trying to posture to the media and public appeal to make the players look like bad guys.
Owners have all the leverage. They lose money no matter what, so hardball negotiations are quite reasonable. This virus is excellent for paring the salary rate trend significantly, especially with expected media contract concessions or clawbacks.
They have guaranteed contracts, the owners dont just get to decide not to pay
I believe the current agreement is, if there’s no season the players get 4% of their contract.
Oh, yes they do.
Who bears responsibility? I’d think a cranky old redneck as yourself may know how to wield that word a bit better. But your misuse of the word is quite amusing as it reverses your intended meaning.
He players do get to keep the $170m already, paid no matter what.
Absolutely, they need an arbitrator and they need it now. It doesn’t really matter what was said in any emails unless the purpose is for one side to try to squeeze the other. If they can’t figure out how to make this work the outcome for the next CBA is very bleak. They will start out those negotiations with level of trust of absolutely zero.
I would gladly be the arbitrator. As a Chicagoan (born and raised) I will be fair; now to wait for whoever will give me the bigger bribe.
Sounds like Chitown for sure!
For how long have you practiced law? What law firms were a senior partner at?
Not enough time to book an arbitrator and go through the process. May 31 is your drop dead date. Without agreement and a firm plan to move forward, expect the commish to issue a statement the 1st week of June pulling the plug on any action “with mutual regret” in 2020.
Sure, there’s time. They simply need to come to an agreement in principle to split the revenues from the season according to a formula, and appoint an arbitrator to examine the figures and certify that the payouts to the players happen according to the agreement. I don’t know that ownership would agree to such an arrangement, and not because it wouldn’t be fair, but because it would tell the MLBPA more than ownership wants them to know about how much money they make. Based on how badly MLB has handled the last few crises that have come along I imagine they won’t be able to do the right thing even to save themselves.
Wow you try to add some humor with a Key and Peele reference and they delete your comment.
Rafi is a classic skit. One of their best.
Has anyone even discussed the possibility of added income from tv rights as the only show on tv right now. Or the long term benefit of more viewers than ever from a hungry for sports world wide demand? Many businesses run on a short term loss for long term gains. I don’t see how an employee goes to work with higher risks and less pay! MLB owners, most sports franchise owners are money hungry asses who are used to pillaging players and communities alike! Get it together and win your fans
Do they? The players really don’t hold any cards.
Owners are losing money by paying salaries. They’ll make some income from televising games, but not even enough to cover player salaries if they come back. Every day open is a loss for them, whether there’s baseball or not. That they’re willing to even consider paying players prorated just to have baseball this year and continue paying guys, clubhouse employees, stadium staff, etc. is a testament to them. If they players don’t appreciate that, they can get furloughed like everyone else.
Sportingdissent is pretty much spot on
Yup. The MLBPA knows that the line they are taking is BS, but they also anticipate getting stabbed in the back by player agents if they negotiate down from full salaries. So they’ll go through this pretence. By next week they’ll have a. deal.
You don’t know that, actually, because MLB’s finances are far from an open book, not to the players and certainly not to the public. In fact if you look at this dispute the heart of it is the players questioning the accuracy of what ownership is telling them about revenues. The players hold all of the cards, ultimately. Well they do at least for those of us who believe watching baseball to see the players play is a lot more interesting than watching the owners own.
@bluesky
No one watches the owners own, but no one watches a single player either. Teams make things interesting, and it takes an owner paying to get the players to play on teams. If you’re expecting to watch the players, without the owners, don’t hold your breath.
No one watches a single player? Sure, in the sense that you can’t have baseball without a team – though Joe Posnanski had a really good article a day or two ago about people watching Mark McGwire take batting practice in 1998. But lots of fans went to see Ichiro play solely because he was Ichiro, and I had plans (that fell apart) to see the Angels last summer because it was a chance to see Mike Trout in action.
If MLB didn’t have its legalized monopoly, or if the current MLB owners closed up show, I could see current and former players creating a new league.
No one is saying owners aren’t necessary, but I don’t understand the stance that the owners are so much more important than the players.
@sportingdissent – Your view assumes owners are being honest about their anticipated losses. Why should anyone believe them?
Because without gates, minor league games, etc…we know what their revenue streams are. Broadcast deal terms are all public, as are player salaries. It doesn’t take a genius to realize that everyone would operate at a substantial loss if there aren’t fans in the stadiums.
Countless baseball web sites, Forbes, etc. have tried to accurately determine MLB teams’ revenues, with nothing more than solid estimates. No one besides the teams know how much they make.
Broadcast deals may be largely public info, but how many teams have regional sports networks that are used to shuffle money around and hide true income and expenses? Many of them. And MLB Advanced Media numbers aren’t public.
I’m not sure why you’re so convinced MLB owners are being honest about their finances when they never have been previously.
You’re a sheep following what the owners are spoon feeding you. I argue that the players have all the leverage here. They are the commodity. They agreed to a prorated salary so they already know if there are zero games played this year they don’t make a dime.
The owners won’t hand over the financials to prove that they’d actually be taking a bath. They’re just trying to implement a salary cap, something they’ve been trying to do for decades. If they were really going to lose their hat by playing this season without fans, they’d show the MLBPA the numbers. But they won’t, because it’s not true.
rangerslegend has it absolutely correct…the players are a commodity, and commodities are easily replaced. If the top 750 players in the world (presumably these are the 750 holding ML roster spots) all quit in protest simultaneously, the next best 750 we could find would be itching to take their place, and the end product would be almost exactly the same. Minor-league and college baseball are popular spectators sports even though the objective skills of the players are inferior to the majors. As long as the talent level is even across the league, a major-league uniform and a professional tv crew would make it look just as good.
I’ve never understood the argument that the owners make money so the players should make money in lockstep. Why should the owners’ success have any bearing on what a person is willing to get paid to do a job? In no other industry is that the expectation of employees. You think Apple engineers who develop the next big thing are demanding revenue-sharing? It’s insane. One comparison to consider: if there were no baseball, what would be a given player’s next best job opportunity? If there were no baseball, what would be a given owner’s next best investment opportunity?
If the players are a commodity, why do some players make >60x more than others at the MLB level? It seems their individual skills are not so easily replaceable.
And why shouldn’t the players make money, too? They are a huge part of what customers pay for. It’s not like they’re nameless individuals in a factory putting together iPhones. They ARE the product, they are why people are spending their money on professional baseball.
Additionally, what other industry has a government-sanctioned monopoly? That’s a pretty nice benefit other industries don’t have.
I’d go just a bit further and say that the players are the only thing customers pay to see. I don’t understand how anyone can claim that any 750 players will be just as much fun to watch as any other 750 players. If players were widgets we would not be watching this game. We plunk down our nickels to see the best of the best play the game. Well, most of us do, anyway. Anyone who doesn’t, are they really baseball fans?
We’ve seen what replacement players looking like, during the 1994 strike. It was a disaster for the game, and it would be again, unless you are looking to baseball for slapstick.
@gbs42 You’re saying the players don’t make money? The skills that make them millionaires are transferrable to pretty much no other job other than the one they have now. That’s generally not a good position to be in when demanding a crazy salary, yet they make one anyway.
Meanwhile, we could pay half a million dollars per year, and in a parallel universe where that was an athlete’s salary, how many of the top 750 baseball players would choose another career? My bet is a handful at most.
The owners’ money and skills are however transferrable to pretty much any other industry. Owners of companies generally pay whatever it takes to keep employees happy, as long as they can be profitable doing it, but little to no more. I can’t understand why that logic doesn’t apply in baseball.
@JR12 – When did I say the players don’t make money? I never said that.
But why would any of them “settle for” half a million a year when the owners are voluntarily paying some of them $36M? They don’t need to pursue another career as long as this one pays so well.
MLB is different because of, 1) the antitrust exemption, 2) the MLBPA. They need to work together for overall best interest of the game so they both can make money. That’s the logic of baseball. Naturally each side wants the biggest cut for itself, which is why they’re still negotiating.
@gbs42 I’m not sure we’re talking about the same thing. Should a player take tens of millions of dollars a year if someone will give it to them? Of course.
But what happens if that offer is off the table because it’s no longer worth it for the owner to pay so much (given that the owner’s opinion is the only one that matters in that analysis)? The players can be as upset as they’d like, but at the end of the day, with the exception of those few for whom a 6-figure salary isn’t worth their time, most would probably choose to play.
I am guessing, based on your comment, that you have seen MLB’s books! Nice they show them to you, but nobody else!
This is just it sportingdissent and it’s like half the members who post here have this block in their heads where all owners/companies/our government are this bottomless pit of money and can just simply afford things.. Well because they are owners/companies/the government.
Whatever happened to forcing kids nowadays to taking 1 lousy year of basic economics in school? nothing is free. Where this money for nothing comes from mentality by half the population is something cooked up the last few decades by loonies.
The fundamental problem with your argument is it suggests you know how much revenue is or will be actually available. In fact, you don’t, and no talk of “bottomless pits” and “nothing is free” and “money for nothing” changes the fact that you don’t know. So what about that mentality?
Your first few lines are my thoughts exactly! Baseball has not exactly been drawing lots of new fans lately; they have a prime opportunity to do so and reestablish themselves as the national pastime! Both sides will bungle this I fear. THe owners will make a sizeable amount on the inflated ad rates…and they know this.
Rights are already set. Numbers today dictate future rights values. How much have both sides already lost in merchandising? Also, fans have less disposable income right now. Yes people are clamoring for entertainment but many have lost income that it has to be free. The real opportunity lies in getting new fans who didn’t previously watch. Only way out that is fair to both sides is for the owners to truly open their books to an outside audit and then use a percentage formula. Owners who have interests in regional networks hide profits and players don’t want a salary cap which settling for a percentage really is. Both sides lose out by not being honest with each other. Too bad someone like Jeter who has made big money on both sides can’t lead a solution. I was never a Jeter fan but now is the time for leadership.
You make a good point regarding fans and current disposable income. With the economy, unemployment, or even just fear of the future in regards to there income… allowing fans in the stadium doesn’t mean they will come. As ticket prices and concessions have risen so much the last few years… it’s difficult for the average Joe to afford to take the family to a game in a good economy.
I think the league will be surprised by the amount of empty seats even if fans were allowed to come to any games. People just aren’t going to spend the money.
Right! The owners are going to pay out on the basis of full pro-rated salaries with no gate because someone on the internet pretends he knows what the advertising revenue will be. It’s funny how owners won’t just spend their money when the internet tells them to.
Definitely a tough pill to swallow for players.. I wouldn’t expect anyone to be happy about it. However, think of it this way: what business loses 40% of their revenue and doesn’t trim payroll? If that happened at my company, I would absolutely expect massive layoffs and trimmed salaries.
I think the league and teams are looking for expanded revenue. Games will likely have more viewers, playoffs will be expanded. Potentially some offsets in there to the losses from the gates. U think that is why they are proposing rhe revenue split.
Unfortunately, the spoiled players who have no real clue of what the real work force is like, don’t seem to understand that. They think they deserve to collect there pay checks even while not “working”
@bigjonliljohn – What? The players got about 4% of their salaries at the start of the season and nothing since.
Many of the players had jobs in high school, college or while in the minors.
They never work out, take BP, hit off a tee, take ground balls or work on routes in the outfield. Never work on base running, blocking pitches, long toss or throw bull pens. All to get a chance.
@CKinSTL – What businesses makes money and appreciates in value as much as MLB teams? Very few. It’s a different ballgame – pun intended.
A team’s value isn’t all that all that relevant. Compare it to your house. If your house “appreciates in value” – nobody is writing you a check for the increase. The value has just gone up in paper and it is unrealized unless you sell it or take a loan against it. Same deal with team values. A baseball club is fundamentally the same as any business.. it needs to take in more cash than it is paying out. If not, it needs to find a source to fill the deficit. If it can’t fill the cash deficit and cannot pay creditors – it faces potential foreclosure.
As for profits, who knows? That is intentionally kept very private. I would sure like to know – especially since nearly all teams benefit from tax payer subsidized stadiums.
People invest in real estate all the time. You could look at this as a rental property. Equity value rises while tenants give you cash flow.
It’s definitely not the same as selling the home you live in and having to uproot a family, unless owners live in their stadiums.
I’m not really following the rental analogy.. a business is not really an asset you can rent-out. The real two options for a business are to sell shares or take on debt, to capitalize on their asset value. Unlike a house, a business doesn’t really have any utility other than making money. A house is an asset that can make you money but there is additional utility in that it can give you shelter – and you can derive rental income off of the latter.
So while selling shares is an option for clubs.. a few things to consider: 1. These deals are never quick. The faster you try to sell, the more power that shifts to the buyer 2. Values of clubs have likely plummeted in the last three months. Teams are in for steep near-term losses and there is great uncertainty. So that asset value, which was assumed to be skyrocketing in value, doesn’t really benefit the team in a short term cashflow crisis.
The other option is to take on more debt. With a higher asset value, you generally get better access to debt financing and better interest rates. If teams are having legit cash flow issues, this is probably the best option. However, potential lenders are seeing the same things prospective buyers are seeing.. more risk, dropping asset values, and potential issues staying solvent. Not that teams won’t be able to get loans, they just might be limited on how much they can get and their rates might jump. I’m sure MLB has strict limits on leverage. It is possible that some teams were operating close to that limit before the pandemic and will not be able to take on more debt unless MLB makes some changes due to the crisis.
Maybe the president will bail out the owners when they go belly up trying to pay those salaries while all revenue across the entire economy is being cut in half. Jeesh.
True! Lol!
What’s the possibility the owners activate the kill switch if the players continue the dispute
100%. It’s in their best interest not even to play this year if there’s no stadium attendance.
Incorrect. If they play in empty stadiums the teams still get tv revenue and advertising money. If there are no games at all then they have to give all of that back and therefore make a much bigger loss. This site is misleading as it keeps saying they’ll lose 4 billion dollars, which makes it sound like they get -4 billion for the year, when in actual fact they make 4 billion dollars less than usual, which still means a profit of around 6 billion dollars. But that’s a lot less appealing from a PR perspective. Owners are pulling the wool over a lot of eyes.
No, you’re incorrect. TV revenue isn’t going to cover team payrolls. Teams do not share TV revenue streams. Meaning the two teams with crazy deals – the Yankees and the Dodgers – would almost be able to afford their payrolls, while every other team in baseball operates at a huge loss. There are 28 other teams, 20 of which don’t even make $100 million in broadcast rights per year. Now that stream will be less (with less games). All teams payrolls far exceed that revenue.
Playing games at all is an olive branch because every day of operation is millions of dollars lost for these clubs. The smart thing to do is to lay off all non-players, furlough anyone with a contract, and check back next spring.
You do realize most teams TV revenue barely cracks $50 million, right?
Even in the most basic fundamental level of math, say there’s 81 games, TV revenue drops to $25 mil for most.
Most payrolls are around $90 mil let’s say. Pro rated for 81 games still forces owners to pay players $45 mil
$25 income – $45 expense = $20 mil net loss
What’s that about being at a bigger loss by not playing again?
Annual league revenues are estimated at $10 billion – not profits. The leagues’s info projected a 4 billion loss on EBITDA.. so that means they are projecting they are going to spend $4 billion more than they bring in (before paying interest on debt and income taxes). What that essentially says is that the owners will collectively have to find $4 billion+ to remain solvent. They will actually get a benefit on income tax next year but that doesn’t help their cash situation.
Now, whether or not you believe the league’s numbers – that’s completely different.
Other big market teams hide profits in their networks (i.e. NESN). Does anyone know if the league had pandemic insurance? Whether or not games are played could be dictated by health concerns as well as the terms of the insurance.
@MJ & CKinSTL – The $4B “loss” excludes over $1.3B in national TV revenue. I can only imagine how much teams are hiding by other means.
Again, you’re wrong. Teams DO share TV revenue streams. There are 3 national televisions deals valued at $1.7 billion which is split among all 30 teams. Another billion comes from MLB Network, MLB.TV and MLB.com that is split. ESPN pays $700 million to air 100 games a season. Yes, then there are regional TV contracts that go to the team. But to say that they don’t share revenue from TV contracts is a complete lie and you really need to stop spreading bullspit.
blogs.fangraphs.com/mlb-isnt-losing-tv-revenues-ye…
Teams are not able to ‘hide’ revenue in their broadcast affiliates or in other legal entities. While most of these businesses are private, they are still corporations or LLCs and each legal entity has to be audited every year by an independent accounting firm. If teams were hiding money from baseball activities in their network affiliate (or vice versa) it would be discovered by their auditors and clearly stated in their financial statements, or the necessary accounting would be done to return revenues and expenses to the proper legal entity. While these financial statements are not available to the public, they are available to the banks and lenders who provide credit lines and if they broke the law by doing so, they would be turned into the IRS and other governing authorities. So this whole idea of teams hiding money in another affiliate is beyond ridiculous and nearly impossible, especially in a post-Enron world. The one thing they could do is have one affiliate charge over market value for their services but again if this was egregious or ‘material’ (in financial terms), this too would be disclosed as part of their audit. So can we dispel this rumor about hiding $100’s of millions elsewhere? It just cannot happen in this day and age.
i didn’t say they would do it illegally. Imagine a big-market team charging its RSN only $10M a year for broadcast rights worth $100M as a simple example. That’s $90M in under-reported value. It’s accounting. There are countless games they can play.
the last thing the owners want is to make no money this year
I’d rather make no money than make negative money…
There are rich owners who aren’t borrowing money to own the team, and the are owners who are financing their ownership over 10 part owners. Those are the ones that could be in trouble, same for the players.
I agree. The idea of empty park baseball is stupid to begin with. It can do more damage to the brand than good. If the players don’t want earnings, then that should be the end of it. Next year may be the same.
Just curious why you think that? I go to a couple of games per year, but I love watching/listening from home. For me personally, it is not unappealing… the lack of background noise might be a little unsettling though.
I dont see the logic in all this for the owners. If they play, they get TV money. If they don’t, they wont get anything (I imagine).
Are they saying it will save them money to not play at all vs getting the TV rights money.
They have to pay the players to pay is the problem. TV doesn’t net them that much. To get the TV revenue you have to pay the players. And the pay for the players is more than the TV revenue.
Not sure why some of you have such a hard time grasping this.
Don’t believe me? Here’s a graph of TV revenue by team. It’s a bit outdated for 2016 but it was the closest year I could find and should be good enough evidence to enlighten some of you
cdn-blogs.fangraphs.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04…
MJ, I get it. TV revenue alone does not cover player payroll. I believe the Angels (I am an Angels fan) for example, in a normal season, receive about $150M from the TV station (they don’t own the TV station) to broadcast their games & I don’t believe they share any ad revenue with them. $150M is probably the high end of what most teams receive. With a player payroll of approximately $200M, where does the other $50M come from just to pay the players, when there are no fans in the stadium?
In a shorten season, do the math with pro-rated TV broadcast revenue & pro-rated player salaries.. TV alone is not enough to cover player salaries.
@ronski – National TV revenue is about $45M per team, and the owners admitted this is not included in their claim of $4B losses. That pretty much covers the $50M shortfall you mentioned.
You’re showing old numbers, MJ. The Rangers make $100 million a year off of their TV deal. Most new tv contracts are just now going into effect, so to show the old TV contracts from 2016 is a complete misrepresentation of the current situation.
Manford lied like a log.
The 4 billions includes less revenue, but not real loses.
The owners agreed, now prove you are honest, and do it.
The players are taking the risks.
No, the fine people working at grocery stores, pharmacies, hospitals, police and fire, etc..are taking the risks. These players will be tested before and after each game and have access to the best medical treatment in the world. The average Joe can’t even get one test in this country. Are there risks involved with playing? Of course the answer is Yes but unlike these other workers, they are getting paid handsomely to do so and will have the option to opt out of the season if they don’t feel safe and not lose their jobs.
I think their is enough money for both sides to come to an agreement, I think they settle within 2 weeks. They all make money without the fans, the TV will be through the roof. On the other hand if they are stupid enough to not play, they might not ever survive the wrath of the fans and media.
The media may show wrath, but they need MLB just as much as the MLB needs them. The media will not turn their back on the money.
TV contracts for the year (and future years) have already been negotiated, so if viewership goes up substantially, the teams see no increase in revenue for this. Most TV ad space is sold at the beginning of the year as well (based on projected viewing numbers), so the TV stations won’t see a substantial increase in ad revenue with more viewers except for the open slots that had not already been sold. So the owners can pretty much nail down the exact amount of money being earned from television contracts regardless of a spike or drop in viewership.
Playing a season this year despite heavy losses from no fans in the stands seems like a huge win win opportunity for both sides. They have screwed up many times in the past by neglecting us and to put forth a show anyway would go a long ways towards repairing some of the damage that was done. I know I remember and I know many of you remember the strikes and lock outs and you will never forget. I’m betting that this season will be remembered for a long time if they end the squabble quickly and just play the games. But, if they continue griping, THAT will be remembered. My god people, go into a room, remember us fans and what’s going on right now, and hammer it out !
The greed is too short sighted. This season is a legitimate opportunity to expand MLB’s fan base because there isn’t much else on TV. That could generate increased revenues for years to come. Instead as they squabble over relative peanuts they are angering the existing base to the tune of lost revenue over the long haul. Better leadership on both sides is sorely needed.
100 percent agree. The MLBPA has hurt baseballs draw of the younger fans with free agency and to some degree arbitration. Now is the time for baseball to do the smart thing and give the fans the game back.
How have free agency and arbitration hurt the game? By transferring money from owners to players? Who goes to a game to see owners sitting in their suite?
I think dpsmith was implying (I’m reading into his post) that due to how long it takes most players to get thru Arb and into FA, they’re not “young” anymore (early 20s). Thus, I think what he meant is, young sports’ fans want to see high dollar superstars in the game that are younger than late 20s/early 30s. I guessing
I am guessing that’s what dpsmith meant***
How has few agency hurt baseball? You really asked that question?
Firstly I love baseball, the game itself. not saying I don’t like seeing the best players play, but it’s the game for me.
I could write a book on that but I will give you but 1 tiny example. How about the FACT that baseball has lost the younger fan base. Why? It’s because kids don’t buy jerseys anymore, don’t fall in love with players anymore because 99 percent of the time, they are gone in 6 years or less and at 14 yeez old they realize this sad fact. Your favorite player goes to the enemy because your team can’t afford him. Players are simply mercenaries.
When you have players who have made half of the value of an entire organization, something is wrong.
Tony Clark is so bad at his job, how do you not have the “Fans or no fans’ in the agreement?
^^ This.
I guess no one thought the shutdowns would totally tank the global economy, but that’s a complete lack of foresight by the MLBPA. Even if you resumed play and allowed fans, how many tickets could you sell at face value? How many corporations have extra cash to pay for the luxury suites?
As mentioned above, the TV deals are set, unless Fox and ESPN choose to put more games in prime time than to provide “content.” Or MLB can extract extra money for expanded playoffs.
It’s going to be a brutal year for both sides, whenever they resume play.
The U.S. government shut down the season, not the MLBPA.
This is always my first thought when I think of the MLBPA. Where did Tony get his law degree anyway. I know they have lawyers, but shouldn’t the main guy have a lawyer’s mind?
Been tellin y’all since March. There will be no season in 2020. In fact there’s a microscopic possibility that there will be no season …. ever again.
Just cancel it. I could care less at this point.
I’ll just watch my collection of tapes from the 90’s when sanity still prevailed and we were free. Memories.
Watching games without fans is just a reminder of the insanity of today.
And watching reruns of games from 30 years ago isn’t a reminder of what’s going on today?
One negative with respect to HDTV is that the quality of those old games on newer sets is basically unwatchable. I sit down but after 10 minutes, I can’t continue.
@22222pete – The fact be that you took time to comment shows you could care less. If you couldn’t care less, you wouldn’t be commenting or even be on this site.
An email from one MLB negotiator to another one recounting a conversation with an MLBPA negotiator, without context or confirmation, is not a smoking gun. Nor does it give rise to an assent to the owner’s proposal that they do revenue sharing in lieu of salary, all using the Owners numbers. The leak of the email is just PR, and honestly, I don’t care about PR. Either the two sit down and make a deal, and we have games, or they don’t. I’m tired of the striptease, Get into a room and hash it out…and if you can’t, fine, and we can watch any other professional sport.
Mlb takes in 10 billion a year. Say 20% is attendance. So 2 billion in attendance. Non attendance revenue is 8 billion
Say they play 100 games with plenty of double headers. That cuts non attendance revenue 40%. So thats 4.8 billion in revenue without fans. Players salary of 4 billion prorated is 2.4 billion
Looks pretty healthy to me. Even if attendance revenue is 30% (4.2 billion in prorated non attendance revenue).
I also imagine MLB will be getting some tax relief as well and perhaps some hand outs by government will be coming
Of course it looks good, you just assumed all the numbers.
Why stop there? Let’s say only 10% is attendance!!!
By the way, gate receipts alone accounted for 30% of team revenue
statista.com/statistics/193408/percentage-of-ticke…
This is without concessions and merchandise. Might want to readjust your estimates. The players are clearly the greedy side in this round of millionaires vs billionaires I’m sorry to tell some of you.
Actually, gate receipts alone account for 30% of a team’s revenue. That’s just tickets. As for concessions, they average out to roughly $280,000 per game at an average of $10 a head. That’s $45 million over a full season. Lost.
Where do you get your $10 a person average from? One beer at a big market stadium can be close if not that. Average of course is less but while some spend zilch on food, I would venture the average for food alone is more than $10. What about programs, hats, etc. not to mention parking and onsite promotions? Banks are known to have credit card set ups just to name one.
@Looie – A lot of people go to the games, sneak food in and do not buy anything from the concession stands. With that said, I agree $10pp does seem a little light. Keep in mind most teams outsource their concessions to 3rd party like Aramark so they don’t get to keep 100% of the concession income. They have pre-negotiated rates with these firms.
And what about parking revenue?
You left out the part about paying employees at the stadiums.
Ironically, all the talk of how “Americans need a distraction and something to cheer for…” goes out the window when money get involved.
Many fans are already in the verge of not watching even if games are played because they know it’s all about the money. Please don’t insult our intelligence and say you want to resume the season “for us”.
I wonder how many owners, CEO’s, gm’s, agents and front office people will travel with the teams, walk through airports and live in isolated hotel rooms, away from their families, all the while risking themselves and their loved ones to exposure? I think I know that answer. Zero.
You are dead wrong about that. The front office will definitely travel with the teams and attend games in person (if they are allowed in the stadiums). They almost have to in order to show their support and ‘courage’ to the public.
They are missing a golden marketing opportunity.
This comment belongs in every single post on this site, haha
Boy, you said it, Chewie.
The country is so thirsty for a distraction and MLB can take this and run. Viewership would be through the roof. It would be the only good news going on the entire summer. People aren’t traveling, movies are not open nor being distributed, everything is closed, people are staying home with no new content out there. They can dominate in a way that no other sport can right now.
Get Manfield and Clark in a room and don’t let them out until they reach an agreement or one of them eats the other.
And for those of you who think the advertisement pay will be through the roof simply because they’re the only thing on TV aren’t exactly thinking about any of this very carefully.
Most business are cutting back on expenditures, laying people off, tightening budgets, etc.
You can ask for skyrocketed ad pricing, but the problem with that strategy is there has to be someone willing to pay it.
Very big question mark in today’s climate.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t the TV network, that paid the baseball team to broadcast their games, collect the ad revenue? Most teams don’t own their TV network.
I’m a simple person who knows the Country needs baseball. Solution: let the owners choose what percentage of the players pro rated salary they want to pay. Then they have to pay them the remaining percentage in three years. That will give the owners a chance to budget that in coming years and players would get deferred money making them whole (minus interest of course).
DJO, that is what I’ve been thinking. Owners pay an agreed upon percentage of each players’ contract for the season (prorated per the number of games) and then, pay the remaining amount over the life of that payers contract (or for league minimum and arb guys, maybe over a 1-3 year span). Just defer the cost, get the game rolling this year, and pay the players the lost wages as the game and country recovers.
Baseball is a great sport. However the way the handle everything outside the lines makes it hard to continue being a fan. Non-stop soap operas that they seem content to playing out in the public. So tiresome for so many reasons…
Tired of rich owners wanting the taxpayers to build stadiums or threaten to leave. Tired of ball players making 1000X what the average fan makes and then complaining about taking a pay cut. Life long fan just about done with the entire sport. Manfred can’t figure out anything to speed up the game, it is dying and all parties involved are clueless to it.
I’ve located a leaked “memo” (text message) between my friend and I about our jobs. We confirmed that we are owed a 75% raise because our employer told us we were doing a great job.
We could see an entirely new economic model in baseball after this, a true revenue sharing between owners and players more similar to NHL or NFL. There are pros and cons for both sides.
I understand this year is unprecedented, but the fact this happens right before a new CBA and the fact revenue sharing is such a hot issue makes me think they might be better off settling the question now.
Pay the prorated salaries over two years, that way the Players Association can claim victory, while the owners can get some much needed cashflow relief.
Several points:
1) Neither side is right. Neither side deserves much sympathy, but the owners are less right, and certainly deserve less sympathy.
2) The owners can absolutely absorb a $4 billion loss. And they can do it easily. That they don’t want to is immaterial. There is nothing that deserves less consideration in this entire matter than what the owners WANT.
3) The easiest thing for the owners would be the cancel the season.
4) The safest thing for the players would be to cancel the season.
5) Manfred and the league are desperate not to cancel the season because of the damage they’re afraid it’ll do to what little relevance the sport still has. Which is a sad commentary on the sport’s desperate quest to matter. They’re not willing to go out of their way to market the teams and players in a way that would excite fans, they’re not willing to make consequential changes to the game that would excite fans, but they’re willing to publicly air their dirty laundry, and to put a whole lot of people in danger in the name of saving a season that’s, at best, impracticable.
The owners absolutely can afford a $4 biilion loss. But can the players afford to not get paid? If I make $2 miilion a year and we play half the season I promise you I would rather receive $800k as a concession than nothing! Multiply by 10 for higher paid players!
If the season is canceled then lawsuits are launched by both sides like its ww3. Players will file for some compensation. Owners will file related to service time and salary deferrals.
Ugly already and about to get worse.
If the players are smart, they will not compromise one bit. Why? By not giving in, they can win big. Why? It will not go to lawsuits it will go to arbitration and the owners will not only lose ( as they usually do), but have to pay players the entire year’s salary. EX: Instead of playing Giancarlo Stanton $11.5m, the Yankees will pay him $23.0m. Of course, you can also count on the players not getting much in free agency and being locked out of Spring Training, then they can charge collusion and get treble damages. Would it hurt the game worse then 1994? Of course, could that bankrupt some teams sure. But getting enough money might make it worthwhile.
Collusion. What a joke. A salary is only what the market will bear to pay. If the owners take a hit this year, you can bet they won’t be able to afford these large free agent contracts we’ve been seeing.
You can cry “collusion” all you want to, but if teams can’t afford to pay the asking prices….. the players can sign for less than asking or go find another line of work.
Both sides are digging themselves a grave. Different type of graves.. but graves none the less.
Nope. Owners could cancel the season without any legal ramnifications whatsoever.
Yep – Concern for Player safety is the only reason they need to cancel the season and move on without any legal ramifications at all.
Correct. Players have no legal recourse to demand their full salaries under the CBA. Games were cancelled under concern for public and player health (rightfully so) and owners are not obligated to pay players for the games missed when this happens.
The only players who get paid in full are former players who deferred some salary into future years. Those amounts have to be paid in full because they are not tied to performing/playing in the 2020 league year. The owners are well within the rights of the CBA to not pay players while it is not safe to play (and not allowed to play in most states either).
I am so sick of this crap. I don’t care any more if they play, don’t play, throw fits…. enough. If the season was cancelled…. I wouldn’t care. I can continue watching HGTV instead. I’ve found some good shows there!!!
I just can’t take sides here. This is millionaires vs billionaires arguing over sums of money larger than i’ll ever see in my lifetime. And the only people who will really suffer are fans.
I don’t care who’s more or less at fault. They need to figure this out or risk another HUGE loss of fans when things get back to normal.
That is not true. Vendors at Stadiums suffer. Small stores around ballparks suffer, bars suffer, tax revenue goes down so municipalities suffer.
“It’s understandable that the players feel they’ve already made concessions”
How is that exactly? The players have made no concessions whatsoever. Pro rata pay of their salary is no concession at all.
The players have made concessions. They accepted a pro rated salary to sit home with there families. That’s some tough punishment there.
@sandman12 & bijonliljon – First, I’m sure you’re both lawyers, so thanks for your earlier comments about the owners being able to cancel the season with no ramifications.
Second, the players have received 4% of their season salaries with no more coming if there aren’t games. They’ve already made concessions.
hmm 4 percent for zero work….that’s a concession? lol
Why is this even a dispute? Owners agreed to pay the owners the contracts they signed. Give them what they are owed. Discussion over
Shortened season is bad enough. Why would they even consider no fans?
That is my stance ( and in the past I have been pro-owner). Why am I pro-player this time? The owners are acting like the Astros… Cheaters. Only by having to not pay the pro-rated salaries, but the full salary of every player in baseball plus interest will they play fair.
Is the glass half full or empty?
Keep disagreeing players union and MLB. What’s the big deal if we lose the other half of the season.
if it is clearly spelled in cba why there is a dispute? owners should pay the players as laid out in cba. even if they are not getting income from fans they will still get tv money. besides, it’s not like they are losing money for the whole season!
I am pro-player but the TV money is not what people think. Why? MLB still has to rebate networks for games missed. I also think adversing dollars will be less. Why? Who can afford to buy cars ( a big part of sports advertising).
not sure mlb teams need to pay back the networks per games missed. if i remember correctly, if there are certain number of games played teams will be paid in full. i certainly don’t remember what number of games. besides, during the partial season, cure may even be developed and that may allow fans to attend games wearing protective gears.
adds may be bought at higher volume hoping to entice fans to buy more cars.
Best solution will be not play the season, and have an arbitrator make the owners pay the full salary of every player in baseball, not a pro-rated portion. Maybe then they will think twice about playing games when the Collective Bargaining Agreement ends.
i agree.
Or they play half the season and get half the wages. Not sure why they can’t iron out a deal.
that’s what players are saying! players think what is spelled out in cba is exactly that. owners want more.
The CBA has a clause that protects owners from having to pay the players when games are unable to be played. The owners could have dug their heels in and paid the players nothing until the year started. Instead, they decided to pay players 3% of total salaries and most of the ballpark’s staff through May. Personally, I think the owners have been quite generous and it’s up to the players whether or not they want to play for a fair salary. Owners aren’t going to be forced into playing a season in the red and I don’t blame them. The two sides need to sit down like grown ups and hammer out a reasonable agreement. If they can’t do that, just cancel the entire season. Or better yet, start up the minor leagues (where they players are not members of the union) and put those games on television instead. They’d still draw a decent viewing audience while the MLB players sit at home seething.
I no longer care, cancel the season, I had it with millionaires (players) fighting with billionaires
(Owners).
They ALL look down at us.
I’m pretty sure none of the players ever owned hedge funds, but I could be wrong.
majority of current owners have and they are in it for money. therein lies their unwillingness to lose their potential income..
That would be my point. Ownership makes sure we know how much every player is paid, right down to the dollar, but how much they rake off from the game is a deep, dark mystery. This is why so many fans resent the salaries of the players and call them “greedy” but never question the corporations who own and profit from MLB trying to make as much as they can from it. Sweet deal for ownership, not so good for the players, and kind of lousy for the fans, if they buy it.
If they don’t start playing soon, they’re not gonna play. Players need time to ramp up.
How about you don’t play and get nothing and the owners get nothing too, just like the rest of the country that has had no income for 3 months!!!
many people work at home for the same salary or partial.
In any professional sports labor dispute it’s really important to remember that neither the players nor the owners give a single crap about you.
That said, everyone could easily absorb a 15% salary reduction for 2020. Everyone across the board.
So true, but not. They care about us spending money on their sport, but when it comes to labor negotiations, we really don’t enter into the equation. Your proposal for a fixed percent salary reduction might actually be something the players might consider. What they do not want is salary tied to revenue, which ends up acting as a salary cap, something that the players loathe.
The real world has already met most of us in the country…I guess these guys missed the flyer…well, welcome to the planet,fellas.
Like others have stated…are the majority of fans going to be able to even afford to goto games (for any sport) whenever (if ever) that time happens? Some very rich people might…but i’m not so sure about the majority unless by some miracle something changes rapidly with this pandemic & the economy.
If these owners and athletes are truly vested in the fans…they might want to factor in some basic economics for not just this season but for future seasons well.
Mortgage/rent/bill payments vs. going to a game?
Hmmm…let me think…
Some teams might be better off not playing vs playing a partial season paying prorated salaries, but if the league overall stood to lose more money by playing even with prorated salaries, they would have never even attempted to make a proposal.
In fact, Fangraphs did a nice piece on the financials and throw a big bucket of water on the notion that baseball stands to lose $4.4B by playing a partial season and paying players prorated salaries. So don’t fall for the load of male bovine feces MLB is shoveling. They are just trying to get the players to knuckle under to make more money this year and use that as a bargaining chip when it comes to renegotiating the CBA that will come after next season.
So, MLB, who colluded for years against the players and lied about it now say the P.A. agreed to the salary adjustment.. In the collusion case they were fined 220 million. How egregious did it have to be to get that kind of fine. I can’t believe what comes out of Manfred or his minion’s mouth.
To make short and simple what so many on here have alluded to….
If the owners numbers crunchers say that the owners will lose more money by playing than by sitting, the owners will sit.
If not, they will play.
The major cost is player salaries, which makes it the determining factor.
Nobody in MLB plays for nothing. Not the players. Not the owners.
If the owners numbers crunchers say that the owners will lose more money by playing than by sitting, the owners will sit.
————-
I don’t think running a business is a three step process consisting of:
1. ask your accountant what to do
2.. do what he says
3. profit
If it was, it would be the accountants who owned the business, not the owners. While I’m sure the owners are aware of the numbers, my best guess is they’re pretty much irrelevant to this decision. There will be losses, but they’re nowhere near big enough to justify looking like a horse’s ass in front of the entire nation, in the middle of a crisis.
The owners are going to do exactly what they should: get this party started, and pay for it. And then, they’ll make up for those relatively tiny losses later, when nobody’s looking. As for the PA, if they’re smart, they’re going to stick to their guns. Because they will win this round, if they do. And, considering that they lost the last round by quite a margin, I doubt there will be any bad blood over it. If anything, this will make the far more important CBA negotiations that are coming up, a lot more amicable. The PA will be a lot more cooperative if they’re able to win this time.
Shameful
On both sides
McGwire and Sosa brought the fans back after 1994! No one will give these guys another look if and when they return to the diamond. If they can’t see that, then go away. Bring on the Stanley Cup Playoffs and the NFL
No one will give these guys another look if and when they return to the diamond.
—————
I’m not gonna presume to speak for anyone else, let alone EVERYONE (the way you’re doing), but I can tell you that I will watch the games no matter when they resume, and no matter how tough the PA negotiates in the meantime.
Except for games involving one of the teams. I won’t watch those, because they’re cheating scum and have no business playing in the majors this year.
The whole thing is dumb because it was blatantly obvious even when they negotiated before fans wouldn’t be going to games this yr. With that said I’m with the owners. With 50% of revenue gone per game the players can take a 5% haircut at least.
The players’ salaries aren’t tied to revenue. It would be great for them if they were (because they’d be making a lot more money). That’s a sweet deal, that entertainers in other fields (movies, TV, boxing, even something as pedestrian as stand up comedy), benefit from greatly. That’s why Tom Cruise is richer than any athlete, even though he makes a movie a year, and then is off being a religious lunatic for the other 11 months.
But, alas, that’s something off limits for most athletes, because leagues like MLB, NFL etc. have a monopoly on their respective sports. So they deny athletes the opportunity to get a steak in the business, the way other entertainers do.
That’s bad enough as it is. But to now turn around and say “okay, so, for the first time in history, we’re going to have a loss, so let’s tie salaries to revenue…just this one time, of course, from next year, you suckers are going back on a fixed salary”…well that’s just silly. The players need to fight, no matter what anyone has to say.
But tell you what: if the owners wish, we can tie salaries to revenue starting in the next CBA…that will prevent this situation in the future, make everything fair and square.
“we can tie salaries to revenue starting in the next CBA…”
Is that you Scott Boras??
BOTH sides need to feel the pain of compromise. There are many players vs One owner in your twisted view, but you neglect the thousands of support personnel including admin staff, vendors, stadium workers, security, media, etc — who all fall under your definition of the owners side.
If the players don’t get back to work and take a compromise, nobody else gets paid either.
You have to remember, most players don’t care about the impact to others in the organization. They have been brainwashed by the union to only look out for themselves and maximize their personal earnings regardless of how it impacts other people, their team or the game as a whole. The MLBPA is the WORST Union in professional sports by far. I hope the owners just cancel the entire season and watch 20-30% of the players cry poor mouth. Bring back minor league baseball instead. I’d certainly watch it.
This is what I want to know when this deal was struck,
1 what explicitly did the MLBPA tell their members? They had to update them, did they say “regardless of fans or not, you’ll be paid pro-rata for the regular season played?
2 what did MLB share with team owners? There had to be a memo or bullet point draft that summarized all the legalese for their review, how was this significant issue characterized?
3 When this deal was announced how was it reported in the press? This is like a major part of the deal, did one side or the other go to the media with a “hey you don’t have that quite right”??
I get that MLB doesn;t share their books completely with MLBPA, but shouldn’t someone at MLBPA think WOW “IF MLB just agreed to pay pro rata even if there’s NO FANS how much are they really making?
For a while now MLBPA have not been the smartest guys in the room, not by a long shot. All you hear from Clark is stale union rhetoric, I don’t have faith in him or leadership to have their heads in the right place, to for once look out for their rank & file. Throwing them and MiLB and draft eligible players is all they’ve done for a decade.
The optics of a billionaires-versus-millionaires standoff is always cringe-worthy but is particularly egregious at a time when so much of the country has been laid off or furloughed. As both sides squabble over enormous sums of money, many in the general public look on with frustration and resentment.
———–
That is true, unfortunately many people think that way. But it’s also true that many people think the opposite. Many believe that most of those billionaires and millionaires have earned their billions and millions, and that people living their lives in envy over the accomplishments and just rewards of others are pathetic.
So maybe it would be best to stick with baseball. There’s no reason to detail what Bernie Sanders voters think about the upper class.
If the owners are leaking parts of the actual agreement and the players are leaking lies and their general confusion about what profit is and how much they they’re abused as simple millionaires this isn’t going to go will.
Just to simplify a little bit though…
Agreement number one was we might miss some games how do we handle this quickly and get people paid over the next month or so while everything is shut down.
Agreement two should have been an easy negotiation to split a completely unknown amount of revenue but to get playing ASAP to make that pool as big as possible.
What it became was a sad display of poor math and outright disinformation that seemed designed to reduce revenue even further.
The idea that player salaries are per game based on non pandemic income is really just idiotic. It’s based only on “I yhink I caught you saying you would do that”
instead of we have an emergency that could cause significant long tern damage to the sport inclusing the loss of 1-3 seasons we have players demanding they get game checks that are completely untethered to income because they signed deals before the pandemic. They don’t care if it hurts or kills the game and they don’t care that other playets will pay that price by getting much smaller deals or no deals at all.
I totally get why it’s unacceptable to renegotiate a signed deal. I also get that there are times when you have to prioritize the survival of golden goose instead of your individual power.
Again. It seems clear and obvious that the first agreement was an emergency measure that was implemented to get cash to the players and get an agreement that would work if the issue was short term.
It isn’t.
Now the players can take a split of an unknown pool or they can get a guarantee of a lot less because risk and income are a see saw in negotiations like this.
Players can wait until owners have good enough income his ability to make promises about compensation or players can take some risk and get a bigger piece.
I keep hearing players say they don’t think they get any of the profits. (How do you get 100 million of it doesn’t come from profits?) Well. This is how you get profit. By risking your money. No one makes profits by working out.
Players need to shut up and negotiate or step away. The idea that they’ll get sympathy from fans with lies and indignation over abuse and breech of contract when there is an option to share revenue and maybe gain for future players as compensation instead is sad.
Athletes have zero intrinsic right to set salary records. The idea that generations of players had to fight to get what players have now but that today’s players will set the sport back decades to save their individual bounties with zero thought to any sacrifice for tomorrow’s players is the perfect illustration of the world today.
Again. Suspend all contracts one year and play this year outside the cba. 1 year FA contracts for players that want to play under a revenue sharing plan.
Resume regular play and all contracts next year.
Owners just can’t go into a new era with expenses set on a completely different model. Players can accept this or they can fight it and accept it after they do long term damage.
we have players demanding they get game checks that are completely untethered to income because they signed deals before the pandemic. They don’t care if it hurts or kills the game
————
What? You think 30 organizations that have ACTUALLY GAINED VALUE compared to last year, and now are worth over $50B, could be “KILLED” by having to pay half a year’s worth salaries?
The Yankees alone are worth $5B. They could cover all 2020 MLB losses, BY THEMSELVES, and comfortably stay in business.
The teams signed those contracts. They should be bound by them. That conversation shouldn’t even be on the table. And, once that’s made clear, the correct business move is STILL to resume play ASAP, with the teams taking all the losses. That tiny little tax on their $50B business will buy them plenty of good will from fans, to be worth it.
The PA bears no responsibility for public relations, or losses in profits. If there was any danger of baseball being killed off, then sure, it would make sense for everyone to make compromises. But there isn’t. The only danger is that the teams will incur some relatively small losses on the fiscal year. Not the owners, by the way: the value of their businesses will continue to increase, even with these losses. So their wealth is going up, even through this crisis. And they’re welcome to cash out whenever they like, there are plenty of people willing to buy a baseball team.
And this is why the owners are the ones at-risk and the players are not; your way ensures the players will be paid no matter what.
Remember that the next time there is an article over MLB’s CBA and you want to take the side of the players. Remember that during a pandemic, or any unforeseen problem in the future, the owner is the one that takes the bullet.
What bullet? There’s no bullet. Like I said, MLB teams are worth more than ever. The owners are making money this year.
The teams aren’t, but the owners are. Their net worth has gone up, and there are plenty of takers if they want to cash out.
In fact, there’s a former player out there, looking to buy up one of the teams. So why wouldn’t I argue for the players again, in two years, when the next CBA is negotiated? I absolutely will. It’s the players who are the reason why the MLB is worth over $50B.
Let me give you an example: since Aaron Judge became the face of the franchise, the Yankees doubled in value. They went from $2.5B in 2016, to $5B today.
In that span, they paid Judge 1.8M. That’s 0.06% of the $2.5B increase in value. So hell yeah I will side with the players again, in two years.
Your example is weak, since the 2016 Yankees transitioned into the current New York Yankees becoming a perennial contender for the first time in a few years, plus a variety of business decisions made by OWNERSHIP and a multitude of other factors. And, along with Judge, there are other rising stars on the Yankees team. Needless to say, a very bad example on your part.
Because you can’t see the bullet, or believe there is one, no point in talking to an ignorant human being lacking basic baseball knowledge. You need a clue, and fast.
Here is the elephant in the room for both players and owners. The Clock. NASCAR is back, the PGA Tour is coming in June, it looks like basketball and hockey playoffs will happen, followed by NFL Training Camps. Most people will no longer care if they play or not, and what the dollar breakdown is.
Forget about a MLB season altogether. Focus on a minor league season featuring one team from each organization playing at the MLB spring training facilities. Networks will televise, prospects will be publicized, baseball will be played … great baseball.
The games will get better ratings then Korea, but other sports will get better ratings ( especially a sport I dislike: Basketball).
What about the contracts they signed with their major league players? The MLB can’t just get out of the contracts it handed out to players, by getting replacements from the minors.
The only reason why they are able to withhold some salaries is because they can argue that baseball is not safe to play. Games are canceled by force majeure. Fair enough, that supersedes contracts.
But it’s the only thing that supersedes contracts. As soon as any of the minors, or even the NFL camp, start back up, that argument is out the window, and the MLB has a legal obligation to start paying out those contractual obligations. If they don’t, that’s gonna be the easiest lawsuit the PA’s lawyers ever had to argue, in their entire careers.
You cannot equate the NFL with MLB. Why? Two factors. 1: Travel NFL Teams only play a game a week, not everyday, so it is easier to quarantine for football.1: TV: The TV contracts which are much bigger in the NFL are easier to calculate. The New York Giants get the same money as the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. The New York Yankees get more money from the YES Network then do the Tampa Bay Rays with Fox Sports Florida.
I have an idea: let’s just change the whole salary system, get rid of fixed salaries and tie them to revenues. That’s what the owners claim is “fair”, right?
So let’s do it. But not just this year. For good. For instance, Gerrit Cole is owed $325M over ten years, right? When that contract was signed, that was expected to be about 0.3% of total MLB revenues.
So fine, change the whole contract. Replace $32.5M/year with 0.3% of total MLB revenues, per year. That means that, this year, he is getting a massive paycut. He’s getting a couple million. Definitely less than $5M. And then, in the next 9 years, his salary depends on how well or poorly baseball does.
The owners claim that’s the “fair” thing to do, correct. So all we need now is for Gerrit Cole to agree, right? Hmmm, I wonder what’s the holdup. I wonder if it’s Gerrit Cole or Hal Steinbrenner, who would be opposed to this arrangement. What do you guys think? Do you think Gerrit Cole would be okay with going from a $325M contract to a contract that, if baseball gets back to the booming business it has been, could add up to 6-700 million easy?
And if you correctly guessed that it’s Steinbrenner who’s against this arrangement, not Cole, does this change your mind? Or do you still think that the players should be paid based on revenue this year, and then go back to being paid a fixed salary from next year?
I think both sides need a dose of common sense…. sit the hell down and work it out like grown men. Come up with a figure per game without fans. And stop procrastinating
It would seem both sides have a lot of motivation to get this figured out.
The email sure seemed pretty clear to me
Just cancel the season. I don’t care anymore about 2020.
Doesn’t appear the PA has anything that states the owners were willing to pay pro-rated salaries with no fans in attendance.
It clearly states they will negotiate in good faith should fans not be allowed into that stadium, so the owners have a sound, contractual clause protecting them. With that said, this should have been fully accounted for in the agreement including the rate of pay they would get with no fans in attendance, minimal fans in attendance, etc… The ball was dropped by both sides here.
Just play with fans who are under 65 and make them sign something to attend. Also no major medical problems and wear masks etc like plexiglass for food sales.
What do you do with Season Ticket Holders who are over 65, and have already paid in full for the 2020 season? Don’t think teams would refund them.
Owners are greedy, but not stupid. They would find a way to help this age cohort out.
And of course those people under 65 will have to swear that they will never come in contact with anyone over 65 or with a medical condition.
Easy-peasy.
Just curious about fans going to games in New York. With mass transit being the predominate way to get to and from the stadiums, how many fans are ready to get on the trains at this point? I’m in Texas, and just wondering
I live in New York, and, nope, I’m not going to get on a crowded subway for 45 minutes to see a baseball game right now. Even if I had great seats. Too much exposure for too long. Can’t speak for other people, but those subways get jammed, people back to back and nose to nose.
I totally understand mike156. My wife and I rode the #4 train from Grand Central to Yankee Stadium several years ago, and while it was a very convenient way to get there, it was very crowded.
No s**t no fans = less pay
The idea that fans won’t come back to see baseball because these two sides have a labor dispute is farfetched. Yes, there will be a handful who buy some t-shirts, and maybe have a feature story in some local newspaper, but the vast majority will come back when its open and they think it’s safe. As for the next CBA, it’s going to be a doozie, because there’s not a lot of trust here and it won’t get better. But if the owners ask for the moon (which means demanding the most of the reduced balance of the players salaries be dependent on gate receipts, then we won’t have baseball. The player’s pay has already been reduced by half, even if they start mid season. Now, make that 50% subject to half of each gate receipt as a function of the $4B. Let’s say they start getting in some revenue…maybe $1B. We are now talking about a quarter of a half, or 1/8ths pay to play 1/2 season. I don’t see it.
The bigger issue is losing out on fans that they could be gaining.
From what i have seen and heard the fanbase is getting older and you are not bringing in any of the younger crowd.
The main reason for this is due to very little excitement over 3 hour games. There could be multiple innings before anything even remotely interesting happens and the younger crowd either dont have the time or the attention span for it. Football is popular due to fantasy football and only really needing 5 mins once a week and every minute or two there is a play involving a bunch of people so there is movement and action. Baseball it could be what on average 4 pitches before there is remotely any action and that is what 5 mins depending on the pitcher and everyone resetting.
This argument might cause some big losses even worse that the strike. It took a steroid induced hr battle to get people back the first time it will be hard for something like that to happen now.
The Cubs certainly picked a great year to start their own TV network.
And it couldn’t have worked out better for the Astros. Half a season at best. No fans. By the time things get back to normal a good amount of people might not care anymore.
Baseball has a chance to do the right thing here, the TV will be off the charts when they come back. Don’t blow this!
Just a question for Mr. Adams. The headline says “dispute” . But the first sentence says a formal offer will be made Friday. How can it be a dispute when the players haven’t even been given an offer yet? I expect the initial offer on Friday will be rejected-initial offers usually are-but eventually both sides will reach an agreement
The problem with all this is that if it turns out that it’s not safe to play (which is exactly what’s going to happen) then all this fighting is going to do exactly nothing but hurt this sport’s already awful relations with the public. All anybody’s going to ever remember about baseball in 2020 is a major “cheating” scandal and a financial argument between millionaires and billionaires during a combination international pandemic/generational economic crisis.
The result’s going to be that when baseball finally does come back in 2021 the sport’s going to be in worse shape than when it came back in 1995.
Cheers.
A bunch of people sitting in a pitch black room discussing what they’re going to do when the lights come back on. And it’s a room that none of them have ever been in before. So they can bicker about what’s going to happen but really they should just wait until the lights come back on and then they can size up the situation. All of these discussions are pointless.
The Dodgers signed a 25 year 7 Billion dollar contract with Fox Sports. How much do they get a year??
It was actually with Time Warner Cable, which is now Spectrum.
But the short answer to your question is, we don’t know. It is also the long answer.
$7,000,000,000/25?
Not really, because it included an escalator so it pays out a lot more at the end of the contract than it did at the start. But the question is how much the Dodgers (or any other team) is able to enforce their media contracts in this situation. Since the teams can’t deliver the broadcasts they probably don’t collect the full dollar amount. So the short answer is still we don’t know. And it is still the long answer.
Tony Clark has no business being head of MLBPA. Manfred just lets him hang himself every time so he ends up giving in since players are dealing with the weaker hand. At early stages Clark should have drawn up several proposals based on length of season 80, 100, 120 games. With fans (100%, 50%) and without fans, expanded rosters or not expanded rosters. Expanded playoffs or not expanded playoffs.
Then he should have worked out the details for each possible contingency starting with the most likely one at that time which would have been at the time 100 games, 50% attendance, expanded playoffs and rosters and got it confirmed in writing.
You had 2 months of doing nothing to get it done so you could roll. Its just beyond belief that this could not have been anticipated and spelled out in a formal letter of agreement
Keep everyone who is at the most risk at home and let everyone else go to the games at about 25 percent of capacity and sign a waiver. Let’s play ball!
Vision
Agree. The math says 280 million a year.
arte moreno was angry at fox for signing for less than the dodgers did. it was $3 bill/25.
No deal by June 1st…..see everyone back in 2021.
No Sports at all in Michigan and Illinois until vaccine is approved.
as it should be. minimizing risks for citizens is a duty of governments.
I’m so sick of the players union. Either you want to play or you don’t. It’s beyond obvious that MLB revenues will be way down with no fans in attendance and it seems like the “good faith” clause is more than enough to validate the owners’ requests to discuss a further reduction in salaries under the agreement signed in April. All they are doing is further disenfranchising their fan base (what’s left of it). Either you want to play or you don’t. You can come to a reasonable agreement on payroll amounts if you want to. They are being unreasonable and the public realizes this.
Meanwhile, a real league like the NFL is full steam ahead. Teams practicing in full this week with a strict COVID testing regimen in place while baseball still argues over payroll and where / how they are going to play. The MLBPA is ruining the game we all love by their greediness and arrogance. Layer Boras on top of that and how can you get behind any of these crybabies? I’d say baseball is done in 2020 and it will take years for it to get back to normal attendance and normal player contracts. Free agents are going to take it on the chin this fall and they’ll have no one to blame but themselves if they decide to sit out this year.
If you read the first sentence of the article, the owners are going to make their formal economic plan to the players Friday. In other words, negotiations haven’t even started yet. It would have been a lot easier if the agreement in March had addressed the issue of no fans, but apparently they didn’t. Frankly, there’s no reason to take sides until the negotiations actually begin, which will begin Friday with the owners plan
I’m so sick of one-sided arguments, like this one.
If baseball started tomorrow I have no doubt I would watch but right NOW I really don’t like either the owners or the MLBPA. It’s ridiculous to even take a side as both are fighting over our money. There is no victim between the two sides.
None of us should take either side in this. Let the millionaires and billionaires fight there own battles. They don’t need it even care if they have our support.
Manfred and Clark deserve each other.
If any owner wants to sell his team by the end of the year, don’t you think that he would get back more money than he originally paid? I’m sure there are billionaires out there who would love to own ANY major league team. Ego of course is number one reason. But number two is, very very few owners ever lost money on a baseball team, and the few that did could write it off on other businesses.
No fans filling seats owners should get to pay less salary. Players need to wake d chit up!! and be okay with a cut of one third my goats but players making the league average which is 4.4 million or less get their full salary. As an owner I would send a message to their candy, take 1/3 cut of your millions or make $0 until next year because the season aunt going to happen. The owners have a business that depends on bodies in seats. yes we all want to see baseball and we can care less who pays for it as long as we get to see our games. But if we’re in the position of the owners than you would all agree to have players cut their salary.
How about this for a compromise? Gate attendance in 2018 brought in just under $3B for all teams, or 30% of the total league revenue. Concessions and merchandise sold at the park probably brings in another 5% of their total revenues, so having no fans equates to a 35% loss in revenue. If total league revenues are $10B and players are paid $4B per year, the players cut is currently 40% of total league revenues. 40% of 35% would equate to a 14% pay cut if the owners wanted to stay consistent with revenue payouts to players. To show good faith, the owners could agree to split this revenue loss down the middle and ask the players to take an additional 7% cut in pay. So a player who makes $10M/yr would get paid $5M for an 82 game season under the current pro-rated agreement. After factoring in lost gate, concession and merchandising revenue and splitting the losses with the players, this player would now be paid $4.65M instead. This seems like a fair and reasonable compromise to me and wouldn’t require the owners to have to open up their books to the MLBPA.
The players have absolutely no leverage in this situation. The owners lose less by cancelling the season. The players need to truly decide if they can afford not getting paid this year. On a side note I think the free agents are going to get screwed in the off-season if there are no games played. (thinking of Betts going year to year and betting on himself) no one could have seen this coming though.
I found Tom Glavine’s comments that the players will be blamed to be interesting ( particularly because he used to be high up in the players association). Why? The demands to be tested every single day sounds like an excuse not to play. Do you know how many times I was tested, before having to go back to work? ZERO. I am sure that applies to most people ( those lucky enough to work that is). Right now the players have the leverage. Why? 1:,Because the owners will lose more then the players will ( 50% of something beats nothing). 2: Franchise values will go down. But if other major sports play ( NBA, NHL, NFL and College), and they use Coronavirus as an excuse they will lose. They need to frame the argument better. The owners cannot be trusted ( look at what they are doing to the Minor Leagues and the Draft), and the Collective Bargaining Agreement is ending so we must protect ourselves.
Get on with it already.
Baseball in light of all else going on is becoming irrelevant. Go away MLB
An email that one interested party sends to his cohorts about what the other party said is not admissible evidence. Show us the emails from the union reps that verify this position. Otherwise, the emails are simply here say and
This isn’t a trial, counselor.