Whenever a baseball player agrees to a contract, the financials of the deal are quickly reported by various media outlets, including here at MLBTR. What gets discussed much less often, however, are the financial details of the people paying those paychecks. Here is each team’s primary owner, along with their net worth, with source links provided. (Quick caveat that financial numbers of this nature are fluid and subject to change.)
- Angels: Arturo Moreno – $3.6 billion. (Forbes link)
- Astros: Jim Crane – $1.4 billion. (Forbes link)
- Athletics: John Fisher – $2.6 billion. (Forbes link)
- Blue Jays: Rogers Communications, chairman Edward Rogers III – $11.5 billion. (L.A. Times link)
- Braves: Liberty Media, chairman John Malone – $8 billion. (Forbes link)
- Brewers: Mark Attanasio – $700MM. (L.A. Times link)
- Cardinals: William DeWitt Jr. – $4 billion. (L.A. Times link)
- Cubs: Ricketts family – $4.5 billion (Forbes link)
- Diamondbacks: Ken Kendrick – $600 million. (L.A. Times link)
- Dodgers: Guggenheim Baseball Management, controlling partner Mark Walter – $5 billion. (Forbes link)
- Giants: Charles B. Johnson – $5.8 billion. (Forbes link)
- Guardians: Dolan family – $4.6 billion. (L.A Times link)
- Mariners: John Stanton – $1.1 billion. (L.A. Times link)
- Marlins: Bruce Sherman – $500MM. (L.A. Times link)
- Mets: Steve Cohen – $15.9 billion. (Forbes link)
- Nationals: Lerner family – $4.9 billion. (Forbes link)
- Orioles: Peter Angelos – $2 billion (L.A. Times link)
- Padres: Peter Seidler – personal net worth unknown, Seidler Equity Partners estimated net worth of $3 billion. (ESPN link)
- Phillies: John Middleton – $3.4 billion. (Forbes link)
- Pirates: Bob Nutting – $1.1 billion. (L.A. Times link)
- Rangers: Ray Davis (co-chairman with Bob R. Simpson) – $2.2 billion. (Forbes link)
- Rays: Stuart Sternberg – $800MM. (L.A. Times link)
- Red Sox: John Henry – $3.6 billion (Forbes link)
- Reds: Robert H. Castellini – $400MM. (L.A. Times link)
- Rockies: Richard L. Monfort – $700MM. (L.A. Times link)
- Royals: John Sherman – $1.25 billion. (L.A. Times link)
- Tigers: Ilitch Holdings – $3.8 billion (L.A. Times link)
- Twins: Pohlad family – $3.8 billion (Forbes link)
- White Sox: Jerry Reinsdorf – $1.7 billion (Forbes link)
- Yankees: Steinbrenner family – $3.8 billion (Forbes link)
$15.9 billion
15.9 billion!!!!!
Money changes everything. I said money changes everything!
LFGM!!!
Thanks for this. I feel like my suggestion has been heard.
I suspect these numbers run on the low side of reality. The mega-rich hide much of their wealth and of course their assets aren’t public anyway and can only be estimated.
Bob and Ray of the Rangers are worth way more than 3 billion. They’re up there in the 10-15 billion as well if not higher. The oil/energy tycoons are backed by a very very powerful bunch. Try finding an interview live with either of them
How could you possibly know this?
I think that if people want to be intellectually honest they should treat this similar to players. Considering now about 4-6 owners have a net worth that is about equal to or less than the career earnings of top players (something that will only increase going forward). You can’t call the Reds cheap if Bryce Harper has a net worth more than the their owner.
By the way, all the accounting and money tricks are available to the players along with endorsement deals and the rich owners still don’t have any excuse (by proportion of the annual income of the Yankees for example, their payroll has dropped drastically over time).
Well, yes, this is a point I’ve been making for a long time. Player salaries are treated like they are public information while how much ownership makes from the game is completely private. If it were me negotiating on behalf of the players I’d put on the table the proposition that either all of these finances should be made public or they should all be private. Since that’s probably never going to happen at least this list gives us a rough idea of the finances on the ownership side, something we (and the players) are not supposed to know. Maybe this will be a dose of reality therapy for some.
Your question is from a fan’s perspective. The players’ salaries made public serve two important functions:
1). Allows for the market to be set for future positions. If not public, you would have one SS, like Correa, making $200M and Lindor @ $341M because each wouldn’t know the other’s salary. This works against the interest of the union and collective bargaining as a whole, wherein the idea is to regulate salaries in some equitable fashion for those that fit into specified categories based on performance tiers, tenure, and position.
2). Works to the advantage of the agents. If players didn’t know how much other players made the premiere agents, like Boras, would not be a desired agent. Nor would his percentage consistently increase, because there would be no consistency.
Owners keeping their income private:
1). Owners don’t want players knowing how much more of the pie they can grab.
2). Owners don’t want the public to know how much they make, so fans of “small-market” teams will still buy into the fact their team must tank and keep their budgets at $60M / year while being supplemented by the Yankees/Dodgers.
3). Businesses are private and therefore have no requirement to disclose financial information to the public.
4). Certainly would hurt their current pricing of tickets, concessions, etc.
It would be much easier to navigate all the financial aspects of the game if everyone was operating on the same financial premises. It’s obvious why owners want to keep it a secret.
1) Salary information could certainly be made available within the “industry” (to owners, the agents, and the players), without disclosing it to the general public. It might disappoint the fans who are obsessed with how much players are paid, but the game shouldn’t be about those fans IMO.
2) I see your point, but why do agents deserve this advantage? On a whole it works against the interests of the players, which should matter more, and the agents work for the players after all. Also, see answer to (1).
On the other points, I pretty much agree with all of them. Thank you for thinking seriously about my question!
Everything that I have seen is that it’s always to the advantage of workers – in whatever industry, not just baseball – to know what their coworkers are making, regardless of whether or not they also know what the managers and owners of the business are making – two seperate but related issues.
Fisher is a pig
He does weird things and when he tried to increase his family’s wealth “all by his own self” he flopped big time…..
Arent these numbers kind of misleading? If my liquid net worth is 100k but i own my house outright that’s 400k, this article would say my net worth is 100k. It doesn’t take into the value of the franchises they own.
Thats partially correct, but at the private banking level you can normally liquidate at cost of cash loans up against the illiquid net, so its closer to having a limitless cc with low rates than a fully illiquid #.
Not if it’s figured properly. The equity in your home should be included in your net worth. The same would be true of the franchises. Market value – debt = equity.
Its misleading in the opposite way. If you are worth 100k does that mean you get that every year in pure liquidity? Can I tap you every year for 50k? Most of these people don’t own 100% of the franchise either
It isn’t misleading unless you misuse or misunderstand the terminology. Net worth is the value of assets minus debt. That’s all it means.
Incorrect. Net worth includes the value of all of your assets, not just your liquid assets.
This is correct. bucsfan0004 would be worth 500K. Of course, and this is one risk the owners face, bucsfan0004 400K house may lose value so his overall net worth can decrease. In most instances this moves in the opposite direction so bucsfan0004 may be worth more some time in the future.
I was looking at Angelos for example. He bought the Orioles a million years ago for a fraction of what its worth now, and the team has likely been paid off for some time. So assuming the team is at least $1.5B, theyre saying that over 75% of his net worth is the team? I find that hard to believe.
I’m positive the Orioles have debt. If for nothing other than a financial strategy.
Angelos isn’t the sole owner of the Orioles either. He has minority owners, as most do.
Whatever you want to say about Angelos as a baseball owner is one thing, but he is a charitable man. I doubt his net worth is much higher than the figure listed.
If bucsfan0004 has a net work of $400K because he owns his house outright then he can afford to pay more for his baseball tickets. And he should fully disclose all of his assets, income and expenses so that we can see if we are charging him enough.
Don’t forget he also owns MASN for the past 16 years, as well as his law firm. 2 billion is alot of money but I think its higher than that. I
He owns a portion of MASN. Also in a significant battle with the Nats over past money.
The orioles are worth an estimated 1.4B. He has minority owners that shed that number down. Let’s say his share of MASN and his firm are valued at a combined 1B.
That puts you a bit north of 2.1B.
I don’t think it’s that far off.
Time for Angelos to cash out and let someone competitive who wants to own a MLB team buy it. He’ll double his net worth if he does so.
Bucsfan: You’re correct. The Yankees are valued at ~$700 billion. This is referring to personal wealth. Nonetheless, it shows just how wealthy even the “poor” teams’ owners are.
For the love of god, please list them by amount and not team name.
Would you like us to chew your food for you too?
Lloyd, I’ve recently had dental surgery… if I send you my food please return it after you’ve well chewed it! Many thanks!
I hate John Fisher….
The closer to the bay area, the larger the amount of people hate him.
Go figure…..
Very interesting. I’d be interested in an informed estimate of how much of that wealth is *from* baseball. I assume this is a relatively small portion for most, but maybe a large portion for some (the Steinbrenners?).
The link next to every owner’s name does provide additional info.
Thank you — missed that!
This list seems to be making the owners seem like bad guys. A lot of these net worths are tied to the value of the team and doesn’t mention the successes they had to get that wealthy.
That being said, it’s interesting to see that there are owners who are clearly less wealthy than others, and their teams are mired in constant mediocrity.
Actually it makes them seem like mega-rich guys. Whether that makes them bad or good is up to you.
What I’d like to know is how much each team gets from the major networks TV contracts.
If you’re talking about ESPN and FOX etc it’s all equally shared.
Yes, but how much per team?
Each team receives $91M per year from the national TV contracts. The local RSN fees vary widely. The teams finances are summarized here:
morssglobalfinance.com/major-league-baseball-finan…
and here
thecardinalnation.com/ranking-major-league-basebal…
Explain how each team gets 91M per year X 30 teams
AND Forbes is reporting that MLB has gross yearly revenues of
of over 10B per year?!
There seems to be a gap in these figures…
According to Forbes, Major League Baseball grossed a record $10.7 billion in 2019. It includes sponsorship deals and other revenues.
How much is shared per team etc?!
The $91M is only national TV revenues. Other revenues include local TV revenues, ticket sales, concessions, merchandise, naming rights fees etc.
So the there are 3 owners worth more than Dolan, and year after year he cries poor. Went as far as to complain a couple years ago about how he has to fly commercial, didn’t own his own jet, I even believe he said he flies coach. I hope there is a season long strike and mlb never recovers, the greed involved is ridiculous. I wish they would be forced to sell, and his brother/nephew should be forced to sell the knicks. Two once great teams held down by greed and stupidity. One to cheap, the other stupid
you beat me to it! I think I counted 4 owners that had more than him. He can take his “small market team” and shove it where the sun doesn’t shine!
It’s kind of like the Monforts here in Denver. They cry poor and keep citing Denver as a small market City when it’s one of the richest and fastest growing metro areas in the country.
Anything they can do to turn a profit and NOT spend money to improve thier club (just look at the Arenado trade).
It’s the main reason I can’t support them.
@IndiansJoe – Read the link. It’s talking about the wealth of the entire Dolan family. Last I checked, only Paul and Larry owned the team. If Larry and Paul (former lawyers) had billions of dollars, they wouldn’t have let dead money sit in escrow when Sherman purchased the Royals.
A billionaire flying coach screams mental illness.
Reminds me of old Sam Walton. Self denial to the point of psychosis…..
You’re using the logic of “Lunch Bucket Joe, the Lottery Winner”. With Sam Walton, it wasn’t about $$ but success in building a business. Besides, it’s a lot more fun driving a ’56 ford pickup than a new Mercedes.
“ it’s a lot more fun driving a ’56 ford pickup than a new Mercedes”
Amen to that!
David blitzer is minority owner is worth 3.6 billion. Blitzer has opportunity to buy the guardians in 2028. Dolan money is in a family trust you goof !
But Yinzer nation always tells me Bob Nutting is baseball’s 10th richest owner. Looks to me he’s 22nd.
Yeah I was hoping that someone else also noticed that. With the caveat that I’m taking all of these numbers with a grain of salt… I’m not at all excusing Nutting for anything, but the misleading way that some of his critics try to paint him as being one of the richer owners is absurd.
I’m from Pittsburgh…a pirate fan…these so called fans always inflate nuttings worth….they cry all the time…same with Steelers fans…all yinzer morons…..they love that idiot Pittsburgh Dad…a babbling idiot
A lot of people may look at the richest owners and wonder why they cry poor when in comes to crossing the luxury tax or retaining/signing players to big contracts but what stands out to me is that the Padres’ owner is “only” halfway to the billionaire club but his team currently has two 300 million dolar contracts on their books. Good for him trying to bring a title to his city. Much respect.
Contacts are dictated by team revenue, not how much money an owner has. I guess you could make an argument that a richer owner doesnt need profits from the club, but no one is dipping into their own pocket to pay for players.
Agreed on those points. The reality is all the owners are successful businessmen, at least in terms of building wealth, and nobody enters into a business venture to lose money. My point was more to illustrate the capability of each team to pay for big player contracts. If one of the least wealthy owners is able to do so twice presumably provided by team revenue and still also presumably be making profits then there’s no reason three or four teams’ entire payrolls should be lower than Max Scherzer’s annual salary.
It costs about $150M to operate an MLB baseball team without including the players payroll. I read somewhere each farm team costs the MLB franchise $10-$15M. The teams pay the MiLB players, coaches, travel expenses, insurance and a facility fee to the owner of the minor league ballpark. That alone is about $50M. Then there are about 200 people on the team payroll that are scouts, coaches, GM’s, stat analysts, IT, accounting, sales and marketing, groundskeepers etc. They generally have stadium expenses and sometimes significant stadium debt. They need $300M in revenue to be competitive.
Look at the Bluejays up there at 11.5 billion.
Nice.
Yea if the blue jays don’t contending this year shipro and Atkins are gone after the season. Pack your bags mark and Ross!
Are the Reds seriously the poorest team in Baseball?
Why does that surprise you?
According to the list their controlling owner is the least wealthy. Don’t know how Cincinnati’s overall ownership group compares to the total wealth of other teams’ ownership groups. Some of the teams are largely owned by the primary owner while others like the Reds have multiple owners and only their primary owner is counted in this list.
Yep. All money going to Tito to manage. His contract in cleveland was 5 million a year. Fact !
Mets fans bout to see this and boast for some weird reason. Gotta take whatever W’s you can I suppose.
Not boast, but compared to the last owners we had it’s a welcome relief!
Seidler is the primary Padres owner, not Fowler
Since Nov 18th, 2020. Dated source material, but interesting list regardless. Happy New Year everyone!
And his net worth is 3 billion.
@MasterShake. You pay too much attention to others, let go and you’ll be free my brethren.
These numbers are from a year and a half ago if you cite the la times link that you have. That article was updated last in July of 2020.
This is that sad moment when you realize, as a Phillies fan, that John Middleton is worth almost as much as the Sienbrenner family but they have 27 banners to the Phillies 2.
Furthermore, the I highly doubg this reflects the minority owners in the Phillies franchise like the Buck family, which would push that number higher presumably.
That’s kinda eye-opening, for me at least.
Then, you realize Cohen has 5 times more and yet his team has the same amount of rings. And then it’s not as bad lol
True, but Cohen hasn’t had stock in the Mets since 1994. Middleton has with the Phillies.
While I dunderstand net worth is not liquid assests and I am sure this amount includes Middleton’s cigar empire, but knowing the owner of the franchise is up there, you’d expect better investment into the franchise, at least one would think.
The new Mets ownership is kind of like a new GM, it’s going to take a hot minute before you start to see Cohen’s total influence. AS a Phillies fan, it pains me to say this, but I have a feeling the Mets will become a force within the next few seasons.
It is inevitable.
Most of those banners are from pre-Steinbrenner ownership.
While that’s true, that’s not the correaltion I was referencing.
How about this (during the Steinbrenner Era):
Since John Middleton became a part owner of the Phillies in 1994:
Yankees: 1996, 1998-2000, 2009 (vs. Phillies) – 5 Banners
Phillies: 2008 – One Banner
That was an entirely different ERA. Parity has come to MLB. NYY will never be the dominant franchise that they were earlier in the last century. Well funded ownership and the rules changes to the drafts and acquisition of players mean that that era is over forever,
Finally an article where the Mets are on top — and MLBTR decides to put them in alphabetical order.
Wah-wah-wah…! lol. I knew I liked them for a reason.
Yes, Stu makes a lot of money, but we can’t expect him to spend it on his MLB team.
Keep runnin
Athletics John Fisher needs to sell his interest to a Las Vegas group . Oakland is dead , and I’m sick of the foot dragging . Move the team , or sell to Vegas .
Can we please remember that net worth is not the same as free cash flow. Just because someone has a net worth of $1 billion doesn’t mean they have $1 billion available to spend.
Amen!!!
Yes, this should be 1st comment or a pinned comment on every single FA post during the offseason.
Also, since baseball is a business, the net worth of the owners should not be dumped into the operating budget. Net worth can be used to invest in capital improvements, but the operating budget is dependent upon income.
Exactly. Also odd how they list the net worth of the chairman for these companies and not the company’s worth or ownership percentage. This is a flawed list.
It’s Forbes and they keep things dumb. I doubt these are the true net worth of these individuals whom have a propensity to own offshore accounts and shell companies.
It’s always important to remember when looking at the ‘net worth’ of owners is that they are rich so they own a baseball team, they didn’t get rich by owning a baseball. That is a very significant and important distinction, one the MLBPA has never understood. In most cases, the baseball team is just a few lines in a much, much bigger ledger.
Thats the thing, most of these teams were purchased for status or because their owners thought it’d be a pretty fun thing to have. Some because they’ve also been a pretty good investment but probably the annual returns they provide aren’t as essential as the cash out value since none of these guys are hurting for income. What kind of status do you get as the hated owner of a perennial bottom feeder? How much fun are you having trading away guys any time they get good? How are you helping the long term value of the franchise (and the league) be behaving in anticompetitive ways?
I don’t believe that the Ilitch family of Detroit is only worth $3.8 billion. They probably sell that many Hot ‘N Ready’s in a year. The Red Wings Dynasty and the Tigers prolonged success probably made them that much by themselves.
I’m impressed how the Padres owner is on the bottom of net worth and spends with the big boys. True sportsman – winning comes first.
Maybe you shouldn’t be so impressed. The teams don’t spend out of the owners’ investment accounts, they spend out of the team’s cash flow.
Yes I know that but teams such as the SF Giants, who have paid off their stadium, have larger cash flow from many more streams, the Padres ownership is impressive. Many of the larger market teams have these streams.
I’m also impressed by the commitment of the Padres ownership. Their fans deserve it after so many years of suffering with indifferent ownership. But my point is the teams are run as freestanding businesses, often with minority shareholders besides, so the wealth of the largest shareholder is generally not the thing driving spending or the lack of it.
Not disagreeing and actually agree. As an Angels fan I would trade our owner for SD in a heartbeat.
statista.com/statistics/193645/revenue-of-major-le…
I know this data is from two years ago but SD revenue was ranked 17th in MLB but majority and minority owners were willing to spend in the top 10. They are likely running less as a freestanding business but likely more sportsmen giving back to the community. Willing to lo$e to win.
Maybe. I believe so much about baseball revenues is behind the veil we can never really know how profitable any given team might be. For myself, I’m convinced that nobody goes into this business to lose money.
My condolences on Arte Moreno, sincerely. Dodgers fans have been there.
Yea, so what. We all know MLB owners are rich. What does that have to do with anything? They still will run their clubs to make a profit based on the financial capability of that franchise. Fans, media, etc should not expect them to spend their personal fortune on their baseball team just to attempt to build a winning team. Mike Ilitch did that once, and while I am thankful for that, it is not realistic to expect his family, or any other owner to do that on a regular basis.
Why do we know how much the players a paid right down to the dollar? Why isn’t that a so what?
I’d settle for all the owners putting out a quality product since they are all in a ballpark financed on the taxpayer dime.
If the owners aren’t going to try, that taxpayer money could have been spent in much better ways for the community rather than easy profit for small group of folks that most likely don’t even live in the community.
Not all. The Angels and Dodgers own their ballparks
Except in the case of the Dodgers, not the parking lots.
And neither can be accused of not trying to put a quality product on the field
what would happen if every owner lost 10 million a year running a team? As far as competitive balance… nothing.
A few people had a great idea, Non playoff teams with the best record should draft first. That would force owners not to tank. And when they are close, maybe they wouldn’t mind losing 10 million a year. But why lose ten million or even zero when you have no chance and it behooves you not to win?
It’s all hearsay until the owners open their books.
I get it. Don’t open the books to the public, but at the very least, the MLBPA should be able to see the books during negotiations instead of taking the ‘word’ of ownership.
The Angels team value has increased $1,816,000,000 in the 18 years Artie has own the team. Losing $10 million annually is a good investment.
And those players that come from rich families, should the family open their books to the owners before a contract is signed with their son? After all these greedy families and their kid don’t need the money.
This is more reasonable to me. At least the team books, not personal ones.
—
Lots of people don’t understand ROI, or Return On Investment. If there isn’t an acceptable ROI, they would seek alternative investments.
As a die hard Tigers fan since 1984, I’m thankful for the Ilitches and all they’ve done for the Tigers, Red Wings and the city of Detroit (even tho he didn’t own the Tigers until the late 90s and it took him forever to finally pour some money into the team).
The year Mike Illich passed away, the Tigers lost over $30M and they had been operating at a deficit for many years prior.
Interesting list.It obviously would be more enlightening if we knew the value of each team and whether or not it is part of the amounts stated.I would also think that it should at least be somewhat easy to estimate the baseline costs of operating a stadiumand non player payroll costs for each along with the various minor league team costs,the bulk of which may be fairly readily available.The total of player salaries obviously are.Over half show holdings of less than 3.5 Billion dollars,which may explain why they are loath to guarantee $350M contracts to players.I am sure that they all remember the Josh Hamilton fiasco.
Let the “evil billionaire “ comments from liberals commence.
Compare the government welfare that team owners receive to build and maintain baseball stadiums with the government welfare than disabled, elderly, and impoverished receive to cover basic necessities.
Now compare the cost benefit analysis for each expenditure.
Now compare the rhetoric.
I don’t know about ongoing maintenance expenditures. I’m not sure I’ve ever heard of a MLB stadium where the local government maintains it…..
But, they give those grants or loans to keep the team in town and to spur economic development. Not sure if you’ve ever seen the area around Comerica Park in Detroit, but it’s a night and day difference before and after. Ford Field and Little Caesars Arena are all adjacent now.
I’m not saying public funds were used for any of those venues. But, if those new places weren’t built, the Tigers would be playing in the wonderful but woefully dilapidated Tiger Stadium. The Lions would still be at the Pontiac Silverdome and the Red Wings would be at the Joe (which was outdated when it opened its doors).
I don’t think most baseball teams are run at a profit.
I don’t think fans, including myself, have much of idea. Being an Angel fan, I know Gene Autry lost money and it is well Documented Disney lost over a 100 million and they won a World Series.
Disney had to sell the team because they couldn’t justify the losses on their balance sheet.
And fans were saying the same thing then as they were now.
They don’t lose money… they just have special laws that allow them to make it look like they are losing money… do instance .. if a team has a $300,000,000 contract payroll… they have an expense of $300,000,000… but those contracts are also a asset they are allowed to depreciate over the contract.. so the $300,000,000 in payroll expense.. is offset by a $300,000,000 depreciation allowance… which looks like an expense.. but of course is not… meaning that $300,000,000 in contracts actually has a net cost to the team of ZERO dollars..
Every major study done show stadiums are a net loss for the community.. as most of the payroll leaves town.. much better to take that money invest it in small businesses.. which create more full time jobs and keeps the money rolling in the community… stadiums are a net negative for local economies.. news.stanford.edu/2015/07/30/stadium-economics-nol…
brookings.edu/articles/sports-jobs-taxes-are-new-s…
They lost money. No doubt about it. Even after selling the team they couldn’t recoup the amount they spent on the stadium.
It’s not debatable.
Disney is a publicly traded company. They did open their books. It’s not remotely debatable. But people still don’t believe it.
@someoldguy
Assets don’t depreciate at a 100% rate. Go re-read “Veeck as in Wreck”, but keep in mind tax laws change yearly. Doubt much of what Bill Veeck worked out back then is still accurate today.
Now there’s a thought: would Jeff Bezos consider buying a team?
@meckert, Steve Cohen would object!
Elon Musk has entered the chat to combat comments.
and let the strawman from conservatives commence.
i’m glad we live rent free in your head, but shame the building is empty and full of toxic mold.
turns out, years of jesus, drugs, and trump has destroyed the foundation, christian flu is finishing off the rest.
I don’t think anyone can actually fathom how much money that is.
And those numbers are so fudged it’s unbelievable, if there is one thing that billionaires do well is the ability to hide their money.
To your last point, I feel like that’s a huge reason owning an MLB team is so attractive of an investment for the mega rich since MLB teams never have to publicly disclose their finances to anyone for any reason.
If a thousand of us all put up a million dollars each, we’d still only be #27 on this list
Cohen muhahaha. Any Mets fan that stuck through the coupons era knows that we deserve this. LFGM!!!
It would be useful to know what percentage of the owners ship group is represented by the listed person or group. Some are 100% of the team. Others are far less.
I know that net worth isn’t liquid assets and cash on hand…but to be worth $2.6 billion and complain about not having enough money to finance a good team and keep your stars in Oakland is asinine. Fowler from the Padres is worth $500 million and their payroll is half that.
This is such a stupid article. Three reasons why, off the top of my head:
1) These net worths are in no way accurate and we’re most likely calculated using different logic depending on the source. For instance, the Yankees (Steinbrenner) value is very similar to the guesstimated value of the franchise which wouldn’t include any of their other businesses. The Mets (Cohen) value is much more than the Mets value.
2) The value of a franchise wouldn’t necessarily take debt into account. If the team was purchased with a lot of debt, that’s a huge burden that is being carried.
3) Net worth and running a profitable franchise are two separate concepts. Just because a person has a ton of money doesn’t mean they should spend it all on player salaries. They are trying to run a profitable entity after all.
Wealthy people and/or corporations owning professional sports teams. Does it work any differently anywhere else?
Green Bay?
Thats the thing, most of these teams were purchased for status or because their owners thought it’d be a pretty fun thing to have. Some because they’ve also been a pretty good investment but probably the annual returns they provide aren’t as essential as the cash out value since none of these guys are hurting for income. What kind of status do you get as the hated owner of a perennial bottom feeder? How much fun are you having trading away guys any time they get good? How are you helping the long term value of the franchise (and the league) be behaving in anticompetitive ways?
numbers are ‘a bit’ off on the l.a times site, to be fair it is just an estimate. On ‘my team’ the pirates, that i know more about.. pretty much ignore the other minority owners and in the 90’s the Nuttings (not just Bob) where minority owners. That started to change after the Nuttings gave a ‘bail out’ loan to the team that was far in the red to the point MLB was thinking about stepping in. that slowly turned around later in the 00’s. More so once Bob started running the show picking up shares in stead of loan payments from my understanding. Makes sense since the franchise really didn’t have the money to pay the anyway ha! that’s just the short version..
I’m not saying the Pirates owners group can’t put more money for on the field product now that the finances are MUCH MUCH better.. Just pointing out there is more nuance to the purchase price with a bit of background.
Also keep in mind that many of these owners have other sources, some it is reflected in the net worth. Bob had multiple going on. think he just sold/closed a couple though.
IMO: the Nuttings saved pirates base ball and were the type of people the franchise needed to get through that time. Once this rebuild starts to become a reasonable team they need to fill in the holes with quality players. They will likely need to over pay to get them too because… well its the pirates hard to find higher end talent willing to play on a team that loses a lot.
Joe- Yours is a nuanced, intelligent, and knowledgeable take on the Pirates situation.It does not fit the yinzer perspective,though.Nutting did spend in the three “glory” years, and he basically has to do so again if BC’s plan works.No team is going to spend on expensive free agents in rebuilding years.He runs it like a business and the ugly truth is that any of the 8 small market teams have a 0.4% chance of winning the WS in any year.
yeah they did have a few years where they spent more but even then it was well more than the average. To be fair to them during that time they didn’t have much to upgrade that would have been much of a difference. almost every move they made after that 3rd year failed miserably. You can point that failure multiple places from the front office down to the coaching staff and scouts… very little worked after that… though the Cutch trade.. like it or hate it.. they did well on.
correction well less than average
Poor A’s fans….you’d expect their owner to be at the bottom of the list with how they spend.
Teams spend what they earn (minus a bit for profit). How independently rich their primary owner might be is completely irrelevant. Any billionaire who makes a practice of letting one of his businesses run consistently in the red, subsidized by his other revenue streams, will very quickly no longer be a billionaire.
I guess I’m blessed as a tigers fan.
We had Mr Ilitch, who was not just an owner. He was a beacon of light for the city of Detroit and had no problem taking money from his own pocket for the city, as well as the ball team. Operating in the red mattered far less than trying to win a World Series.
He was an incredible man, philanthropist, and savvy business owner. Baseball(and the world) could use more people like him.
Maybe the owners should invest more into making the team move the needle towards the green than use the excuse of ‘we’re operating in the red’. I don’t disagree with you, but don’t you have to spend money to make money? You’d figure a good business man would figure out a way to not just make money off something as innately loved as a baseball team, but to grow the exponential value of it as a whole.
Like I said….poor A’s fans. They don’t deserve how they’re treated.
It’s just a scam at this point. Pirates too. Nutting and Fisher gotta go – they literally dont care about baseball, just their own net worths. Being that you -can- run a team with no money spent on players and still make a profit, that’s what they do. It’s not ethical or moral or fun for anyone but themselves.
And then what, we get that gross Moneyball movie, which if you strip it back to what its really about, is just about a worker making a billionaire more money via not paying proper wages. We deserve better and MLB has to step in and either force Fisher to sell, or install a salary floor of $200M – make everyone pay stars what theyre worth while they are good.
What’s more interesting than net worth of owners (and these are sketchy numbers to say the least, since in several cases the “net worth” of a team’s owner is less than the value of the team, and they all have lucrative other businesses) would be the net revenue vs expenditures of each team. But sadly, except for the Braves that is not available. It would tell us a lot and also make CBA negotiations a lot easier. I suspect revenue is a LOT lower than many fans imagine. The owners all make profits off their teams (well, not in 2020, but usually). But it’s a lot less than we we think for most of them. Just do the math. Unlike in other sports, the checks from the national contracts are small.
Another interesting thing about these numbers … Other than the Marlins, who have one of the lower valuations in baseball, no team has changed hands since the early teens, when there were a bunch (Dodgers, Padres, Rangers, among others). So no one really knows what the big market teams are worth, especially in the context of a quickly shifting broadcasting landscape (the Dodgers were only worth what they went for in 2012 because of the promise of a massive TV deal, which has lost money every year since).
The Yankee numbers, btw, are based on 2014 financial info. It’s been reported, for example, that the team alone would sell for in excess of $5B if it went up for sale. I don’t know if all the other links are equally out of date. My guess is not. Some are probably easier than others to find 2020 info as compared to others.
Beyond that, despite the value of the team, which is not liquid, it serves as a reminder that the Yankee owners are relative paupers compared to some other owners who spend a fraction of what the Yankees do. Their wealth is tied up in owning the team, and it’s split among many family members. Hal is the managing partner who in many ways is responsible for running the family “trust.” By his own words, he’s a “financial geek,” and accountant. It explains how he runs the team because, unlike his father, he can’t simply decide to spend more. It’s a family decision, and the profits are the family’s profits. That’s why the Yankees are no longer the Yankees many believe, and why they won’t on a whim run up their payroll to $300M and beyond, as I suspect the Dodgers will soon, and certainly will the Mets.
The real business genius of the Yankees was the father, George. He used no more than about $150K of his own money when he purchased the team with a group of investors, then over time bought out (or pushed out!) the rest. He then reinvested all profits back into the team on the field, which then drove up the value of the team, repairing the brand diminished by CBS’s ownership. He launched the YES Network with Goldman Sachs, YES Hospitality with the Cowboys, and in the process became one of the richest Americans not because of his prior family business, but because he owned the Yankees. He and his children are unique in that sense. As the Forbes article says, the Steinbrenner family has made more money and wealth by owning a sports team than any other family.
The lesson. If you have an actual billionaire owner, they can opt to reinvest money back into the team to increase value.. Are you listening the Dolan’s of Cleveland? They’ve done the opposite. They keep cutting back, driving fan apathy.
The Yankees spend more than other teams (besides the Dodgers) because their baseball business takes in more revenue than any other team. The Yankees own a cable TV company, sell by far the most merchandise, and pull in more from ticket sales than anyone (the latter again, except for the Dodgers). It has nothing to do with the independent wealth of their owner.
I don’t understand why fans cannot wrap their heads around the fact that baseball franchises are completely separate businesses, which make and spend money quite independent of the other wealth of their owners.
I think you’re missing my overall point, seamaholic. I’m not saying the Yankees are poor. I’m noting that the individual Steinbrenner children are not as wealthy as other owners who made money elsewhere. Cohen has pretty much said he’s going to use his own money to help the Mets. The Steinbrenner family wealth is tied into the team. Hal runs the Yankees as a business; George ran it as a passion, but yet he was an excellent businessman.
Whatever we might think about the way they run their teams, there are some very smart people on that list. It’s not all inherited money. If someone earns their money honestly, whether through business talent or athletic talent, fine. I only care about a quality product on the field.
And why would anyone assume people who inherit money also aren’t smart business people?
I wasn’t making that assumption. But, nasdaq.com/articles/generational-wealth%3A-why-do-…
I ate a breakfast hot pocket this am. Bet no one on that list has ever had one.
I don’t know. I’m sure a hot pocket has been eaten by some. I mean, who occasionally doesn’t like a hot pocket!? Hank Steinbrenner. I guarantee he had hot pockets. Of course, he’s dead. Maybe there’s a connection!
The root of all evil
For all you kissing billionaire ass, remember that no one gets rich without ripping off someone else.
Its literally impossible to be a billionaire unless something is broken. We never had them until Reagan came in and repealed as much socialist policy as possible, and now America has billionaires and homeless. Great work everyone.
The wealth gap has been increasing for a long time. This is nothing new.
Inflation is a huge reason why there’s billionaires now.
That’s why your grandfather’s house cost him 50k in 1970 is going for 450k today. To overlook that is negligent.
This is true. There’s a reason Hal Steinbrenner supported lowering the CBT threshold to $180M.
Now I understand why the Reds are trying to dump salary. The owner should sell the team to someone with the resources to consistently field a competitive team.
Remember he’s just the majority owner. There are multiple others in the ownership group
“Gotta pump those numbers up! Those are rookie numbers!”
Ownership Groups need to be added to the overall discussion.
Many of these clubs aren’t ruled by one man. Many of these names you see on the list are just the public face of an ownership group.
I dare say the percent of ownership group members that actually care about baseball is way smaller than you think.
How is the owner of the Reds worth 400 Mil while the Reds franchise is worth 1,085 mil?
Forbes list of franchise values 2021
forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2021/03/26/baseballs-…
There are other owners. This is the case with the majority of teams.
And presumably some debt.
Castellini is the poors.
John Fisher and Bob Nutting stand out as the most common “cry poor”s when there is nothing preventing either from spending $300M a year on player salaries. So, they are scamming MLB, the company, the entity.
MLB has to enforce $200M floor on the league and make them abide by it or to sell to a new money billionaire who will happily put big money down for the best possible players, because they are trying to win first, make money second. All owners should require this.
That’s honestly so stupid. It’s just so blatantly obvious that you’ve never been taught finance. But think you know enough to comment nonsense like that.
I’d have to pull up the Pirates revenue projections but I doubt it’s even that high. You’re an absolute idiot if you think they can spend $300MM a year. Both could spend some more—I’m not going to argue that in the slightest.
I could delve into why that statement is so dumb—BUT you just wanna say owners are cheap, so I’ll let you.
It’s been a nightmare being an A’s fan under John Fisher, who has been nothing but an infuriatingly cheap, cowardly cheapskate who rarely shows his face in public because he’s scamming so many other people to add to his net worth. All he had to do was give out like three $100M deals and nothing happens. Instead he goes full scumbag mode and tells Billy to make the trade.
forbes.com/teams/oakland-athletics/?sh=40f7a34826a…
This is a good site. I don’t know how accurate Forbes is (probably more estimations), but it gives you a good idea. You can look at any team for the past 10 years. Of note, it’s always the prior years numbers when looking at a specific year. Notice the operating income each year.
Yet the public gets forced into building stadiums for them every year.
Good point, Dave. Yes, it ought to be a condition of their monopoly that a team may not accept government or taxpayer money.
When one city can do it, another has to do it to compete. Just ban it if they want to run a monopoly.
The teams and owners donate campaign monies to the local pols. They label stadiums as multi-use with eighty baseball games and five concerts. The owner whine becuse their annual net profits are low but the value of equity in the team grows by hundreds of millions and more. They do not use that equity to repay taxpayer monies.
I agree with that. Public funding should not be available to a monopoly like the mlb.
They can privately finance these stadiums. But people love their sports and continue to vote to pass these provisions to do so.
Unless you’re in Oakland, California. Who will probably lose another team in the next 10 years.
My net worth: -$77,000
This article seems either reckless or biased to not include a definition of net worth. Assets are significantly less than capital yet both are pieces to the net worth puzzle.
If you don’t understand net worth then there’s a problem. You’re probably not wrong that a number of individuals do not. Hard to believe….
You could read into the top paragraph as being a bit slanted. simply the net worth of the owners would’ve been just fine.
There’s a major difference between how it was written here and something along the lines of “owner X is estimated to have a net worth of $3Billion, of which $2.99Billion is represented by ownership of Company™”
How are some majority owners worth less than the stake in their franchises?
You assume a baseball team that is valued at 1B dollars means that the owner is worth 1B. That’s not the case.
These organizations carry debt. All of them have loans of some sort. Some more than others. Steve Cohen didn’t buy the Mets in cash. He may be one of the few that could’ve—but he didn’t.
For a lot of these owners this is their primary investment vehicle where most of their worth is tied up.
false… they story is about NET worth..
Owners net worth though has zero impact though on a team’s annual payroll.
Even last year when teams claimed huge annual losses, including the Phillies, there are multiple alternative lines of financing available depending upon the debt. Teams can just take out a line of credit if necessary.
MLB owners NEVER use a nickel of their own personal wealth to find a team’s annual operating expenses including payroll. Those days are long gone.
Teams only claim losses… any good accountant would tell you they have special tax rules to cook the books with.. for instance… did you know that for ever contract they sign a player too… they take 2 deductions… the cost of paying the player… and they depreciate the contract… lessening their visible net income by double dipping the books… so in reality a contract isn’t an just expense to them.. it is also an asset which they use to hide their true incomes and not pay taxes… and thats the fact
$15.9 Bills = SwaaaKkkaaatttaaaaaaa !!!
and the Billionaires still bilk the public out of billions extorting stadiums and tax breaks and special treatment off a Legal Monopoly and special legislation to shield them from the Minor league players suits… and… laugh all the way to the bank..
GoFundMe for the non billionaires?
These guys are poor compared to NFL owners.
The A’s owner worth that much and he spends THAT LITTLE on his squad? I would be PO’d if I was an Athletics fan right now!
As Walter O’Malley, who owned the Dodgers at the time, said to a plane-filled group of owners as they crossed the ocean: “Do you realize how much better off baseball would be if this plane crashed?”
“Baseball is too much of a game to be a business, and too much of a business to be a game”, as someone (Branch Rickey?) once said.
Some of those figures are misleading of course. No one can really judge how much any given owner is committed to winning unless you see a balance sheet, And every team’s financials are different, based on reverse integration, stadium/RSN ownerships, etc. It’s difficult to generalize. Andrew Zimmerman, the well renowned Amherst College economist, maintains that if fans knew how little owners were committed to winning, no one would go to the games. I doubted that for a long time until I saw the Stienbrenners and John Henry start crying about the Luxury Tax; both their teams could DOUBLE their payrolls, and still enjoy high profitability.
Misleading, maybe, but since team balance sheets are private and secret, it’s just about all we get to know about the finances of the people who own the teams. Lots seem to believe we shouldn’t know or care about team financials, but they sure do care about how much players are paid. That they want to know and believe they are entitled to know right down to the nickel.
I don’t know about doubling their payroll especially in a number of small/medium markets but owners are chronic & massive liars about annual profitability dating back to at least the 1981 strike.
When owners have been forced by the courts to hand over their actual financial books (1981, 1994 strike) or when they are leaked (several teams to Deadspin nearly a decade ago), they paint a very different picture.
Increasingly actual MLB baseball teams are just one part of the business too as teams look to diversify revenue streams (e.g., buying minor league teams) or real estate development on the land around the stadium.
The new big sources are going to be sports gambling and the IT companies looking to get get MLB broadcasting rights. Owners won’t care if over there course of a season that their games are on several different mediums as long as they receive a larger annual paycheck for those broadcasting rights.
Key is not owners worth but actual amount of income each team brings in.
Wrong…. see every team is like a landlord. The property can go up in value and you might have to evict a tenant and lose money in any given year and be in the red, yet still increase your wealth. I know…. mindblowing… this is why the rich get richer and the poor… you know.
Listing what both Fisher and Dolan are worth is like a huge kick in the nuts to both the A’s and Guardians fan bases.
It is interesting to see that it is the Owner of the Reds that is worth the least of the 30 teams.
The article lists what the entire Dolan family is worth. James Dolan doesn’t have any shares in the Gaurdians.
Sadly, prices will never ever go down. Just the quality of play for a few years with some season ticket specials and more dollar dog days.
I don’t begrudge the owner’s overall wealth and it doesn’t affect how competitive a baseball team is annually.
It does drive me almost to the point of irrationally when MLB owners receive tens/hundreds of millions of dollars in public support to build a new stadium and then simply pocket that money when the team is inevitably sold.
It is one of the most egregious and foolish types of public subsidies for any kind of private business in the U.S.
To see Cleveland’s owners have $4.6 billion and be as cheap as they are is shocking.
Guardians Ownership is bringing in a New Minority Owner for 500M.
Guardians and other teams should be required to spend at least 120M on the on field product or be forced to sell the team (:Floor” of spending should be in the new MLB agreement with the Players Union).
They don’t “have $4.6 billion”.
It’s a combination of publicly traded securities and estimated valuations by journalists that have no access to private financial records.
And there’s a reason rich people are rich; it’s because they don’t spend money just because they have it.
What was the Net Worth of the Wilpon family when the owned the Mets?!
Why did MLB let the Wilpons own the Mets in the largest TV market in the country and strip mine revenues from the franchise for their personal financial portfolios for years?!
It is not up to NY Mets fans to make up losses for bad investments with Bernie Madoff etc…Those revenues were monies spent by the Mets fans with the expectation that the funds would be spent on putting a quality product and baseball team on the field every year…NOT to make up for bad investment decisions by the Wilpon family in their other business interests investments (Bernie Madoff) etc…
If some of these owners/families do not have the proper net worth and cash flow to own and run and competitive team, then should MLB and the Players Union be allowed to force them to sell their franchise to New Ownership that has much more cash, wealth, business skills to run a profitable franchise and spend their revenues on the on field product?! These “competitive balance” and “team spending issues” should be in the baseball deal/contract between MLPA and Ownership. We know that MLB Ownership will not listen to the fans on these issues. It is up to the MLB Players Association to represent these issues for the fans etc…
Seeing the net worth of these owners explain why team payrolls are low. You really can’t expect owners worth less than a billion dollars to be paying 100M+ in payroll obligations a year. That’s just in player salaries they have other expenses too.
They should dip into the equity of their teams values or get out of owning the team.
Why don’t you send them money? Create a GoFundMe page?
For example, suppose you own the local pizzeria. You have @00k in revenue and expense. Should you be reaching into you retirement account to create a better experience for your customers?
How many times “can you dip into your teams equity”
How many 2nd mortgages will the bank let you take out?
The truth is 95% of fans don’t care how much you make if you win. I don’t think there’s too many Braves fans that give a shh about liberty’s financials.
Castellini slumming it at $400MM…
Add $2.5B to that number as the Reds are one of the most iconic franchises in MLB. First team, original NL member…That brand is worth a fortune
@Jay
It’s pretty funny to see how many people really have no clue about finances whatsoever. The comment above about borrrowing on team equity and now this.
That 2.5 B figure you just threw out there is just in your head. The reds aren’t worth that much. I’m sorry. That’s at least a billion too high.
Castellini is not the sole owner. He’s part of an ownership group and there are minority owners as well.
It’s not really surprising to see so many Americans are in credit card debt after reading some posts here.
2007 wants to say hello. I remember having those conversations. Like taking out HELOCs was a smart thing. Or afterwards, when everyone was saying home ownership was a terrible idea. Only to be frozen out of the market again. Or the number of people that bailed out of the market when Trump was elected.
Or way before then. I know someone that had a pretty good job, which they quit to become a day trader. Somehow thinking that $50k in capital would somehow churn out enough income to replace her $60k/year job. I didn’t last long.
Someone else tried to flip a house, probably because they saw a show on TV. They spent every Saturday and Sunday fixing the house. They paid months of mortgage payments before finally giving my friend a good deal. He showed me the work that they did, and it was a perfect example of why carpenters get paid to build houses, and accountants get paid to add up columns of numbers.
Well, a more salient post would be to document a franchise’s profit/loss figures. No matter where they fall in this listing, I doubt any owner is losing money, and would suspect that each could comfortably live off of what owning an MLB team entails each year
I’m over it. It gets harder each year to rationalize the incredible wealth that is bestowed on owners and players alike and pushes me to remember to just enjoy the game itself.
The A’s have an ownership group with John Fisher being the majority owner. But not by much. I would like to see further analysis to show how much each (what %) each owner has in every organization.
These net worth amounts are all severely understated. Every MLB team is worth at least $2B and several such as the Yankees, Cubs Red Sox, Mets and Dodgers are all worth well over $5B. All it takes is one Mark Cuban, Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos or Steve Ballmer to decide he wants to own a team and $2B for each of them is nothing.
With this in mind this whole article is somewhat worthless!
Good point; if someomne owns a team worth $2 billion, how can he have a net worth of only $800 Million? That said, some “owners” simply have one piece among many; you can be a majority owner with only a 20% stake.
Debt is how. The operative word here is “net.”
Right; never risk your own money unless it’s absolutely necessary.
Absolutely wrong. Forbes just put out an article saying the average value of an MLB team is less than $2B.
Just for fun, you can actually Google these articles, for free.
The billionaire owners laugh at the multimillionaire owners behind their backs.
Can someone quickly ELI5 how the Yankees supposedly have the deep pockets and supposedly outbid other teams when other owners have way higher net worth?
How is any principal owner worth less than the team and less than their investment in said team? Many of these numbers are off by billions.
As others have explained:
1-Teams, and other companies, often have loans.
2-Often, the primary owner doesn’t own 100% of the company.
No MLB team is bought with straight cash out of somebody’s bank account. No owner wires 2 billion dollars from their bank account when he goes and buys a team.
Almost No large commercial real estate owner pulls out the full purchase price of his building out of the bank account. Nearly everything in the world is financed with debt. MLB teams are no different.
Kind of blows my mind that people don’t know this.
Consulting firms and Investment Banks underwrite these kind of transactions. Cash sales do not happen in the major professional sports world any longer.
With the cost of debt, you’d be crazy to not float a loan. The juice on my last mortgage was 2.75%. The return on the stock market might’ve been 10% since then. That’s pure dumb luck, but l/t equity returns is a lot higher than the loan.
Absolutely. Your stock market return is probably on the low side if this was recent. But if you look at average yearly returns of the S&P 500 v the cost of debt on a residential mortgage—you’d be an idiot to not take that loan.
Not to mention the tax right off you get for that interest.
New definitions of idiocy seem to be created daily. So here’s another. You’d be an idiot to take on debt that you aren’t completely certain you can repay. Because that does happen every day and it’s the fast way to financial ruin.
BlueSky cmon buddy. Enough now.
We’re talking about floating a residential mortgage instead of using cash that we’re presuming you have.
Stop arguing to argue
Though what you’re saying is not even accurate.
how many people are 100% sure they can pay off their mortgage when they take it out?
Certainly not many. I’m certain that I could cover mine for a year without any income whatsoever. But you’d be advising people to rent forever if that was the case. Because very few can be absolutely certain they could pay their mortgage forever. Because very few people have their mortgaged amount in a bank account somewhere.
You have to be comfortable and as sure as you can be. don’t carry any credit card debt is a better tip.It looks like you need to be careful on what you recommend given the replies I’ve seen on this board.
BlueSkies_LA
You’d be an idiot to take on debt that you aren’t completely certain you can repay.
========================
If you are relying on complete certainty to make decisions, it feels like you might be doomed. We would be living in caves if Main Street and Wall Street didn’t take well-reasoned gambles. Dell owes $32B last I looked. Microsoft owed $58B. Without that debt, you likely wouldn’t have a computer or operating system to run that computer. If you needed to save $300k in cash to buy a house, you probably wouldn’t own one.
Which is not to mean you shouldn’t be careful. But it also means that you shouldn’t live in a basement somewhere for fear of things going wrong.
jbigz12
Your stock market return is probably on the low side if this was recent.
============================================
1-Probably way low. When I started this job, 6-7 years ago, I told my partner that if the S&P could go from ~2,000 to 2,500, I’d have it made.
2-That said, I don’t consider this real money. We borrowed $10T so people could go out and buy things. and so government guaranteed pension plans don’t go under. And so various presidents could brag that the economy expanded 2.5% instead of 2%.
I’ll take the money, but I also know that my kids and grandkids will have to repay it.
@jbigz12. Nope, just arguing financial sense, something the vast majority of people don’t have. The last debt crisis was only a few years ago. I can remember it very well, and why it happened, even if some seem to have blotted it out of their minds.
@JoeBrady. Complete certainty in this case means knowing that you are not over-leveraged, and also have enough cash in reserve that a sudden loss of income won’t destroy you financially. If we learned anything at all in the financial crisis it is that the lenders can’t be trusted to do that for borrowers, the borrowers have to understand these principles and take responsibility for it themselves. So please don’t alter my point to make it easier for you to dismiss. That’s a cheap and obvious trick.
@joebrady… unfortunately most people cannot even comprehend this simple formula. In most cases, if a loan is less than what you can make in the stock market it is worth it. (i.e. A mortgage loan)
Fortunately at least some people can comprehend that “what you can make in the stock market” is hardly guaranteed, that you have to be prepared for long stretches when you make nothing, or your asset values drop, sometimes by a lot. If your financial planning requires you to liquidate investments at the worst possible moment to cover debt, your planning is lacking. This comes from someone who has been a successful investor for 35 years and has seen all sorts of financial lunacy, of which being over leveraged is numero uno. None of this argues for not taking out a mortgage to buy a home, something nearly everyone has to do. The objective though should be to pay it off, which is something hardly anyone does.
I’m An investment banker by trade. This is obviously done with cash you don’t need today. If you have $250k sitting in a bank account—i don’t know any financially intelligent individual that would tell you to go buy a house in cash.
Everyone should talk to a financial advisor. There’s plenty of data to show the returns of investing your money in the S+P (or whatever index you want to look into) v. Other asset classes. Your investment horizon must always be considered and you should put some % of your money in risk free vehicles depending on risk aversion. (Something a house is not)
This really wasn’t where I was going with this. I don’t think for a second you don’t understand finance. I’ve seen Joe talk and he has a strong grip on it too from what I can tell. This became something it didn’t really need to be.
It might be obvious to you, me and some others, but not to most people (in my experience). I’ve been exposed to way too many debt addicts over the years to believe that anywhere close to a majority understand the trip-and-fall hazards of debt. Anyway, I certainly agree that this has gone off the topic. I only felt like I needed to stick with it since I’d brought up debt in the context of baseball ownership, and it isn’t as if over-leveraging hasn’t become a problem for some owners. So it isn’t entirely off-topic, it just drifted.
@joe
Yep. Play by the rules that are given is all you can do. There’s quite the financial hole we’ve dug the country into. No country has ever been able to resist printing more money in tough times. That and all the wasteful spending…..
It’s be super complicated but I always thought of professional sports teams paying players based on performances.
You have standard based contracts based on experience and years are negotiated with player and the team.
Then you calculate x $$$/specific stat.
Players get the money based on their performances. You can add it bonuses as well for certain metrics or awards.
All that negotiated are years with the teams they sign for.
The $$$ can adjust based on revenues.
Too much wealth at the top.
I’m not sure what this post is trying to do but I see over 300 comments so….. Mission accomplished?
Unfortunately, the Guardians are owned by the wrong branch of the Dolans. No way their owners (Larry and/or Paul Dolan) are worth $4.6 billion.
Salaries and overhead are paid with CASH, not net worth.
Cash comes from ticket sales, concessions, parking, merchandise etc.
Next time your mortgage is due tell the bank to take it out of your net worth and see what happens.
Net worth can be converted to cash though. Sometimes, you can refinance your home to pay for your mortgage.
Pirates owner Bob Nutting is worth $1.1 billion and pays his employees of his businesses minimum wage. He inherited his wealth and that’s how he adds to his fortune. Collecting welfare checks from other baseball owners has been very profitable for this soulless man.
Yeah, these kinds of stats put it all into perspective when the big market versus small market argument rages once again. It’s not about market, not about attendance and as Nutting’s wealth makes clear, not about on field success or even competitiveness. Throw the fans some fireworks days, some cheap t-shirt promos, and let them eat cake. What a sick joke
are the numbers quoted an indication of the various principal parties’ ability to sustain the team or is the value of the MLB franchise factored into these net worth calculations?
The Ricketts (Cubs) are worth over 4 billion but claim to be broke and resort to dumpster diving. Ricketts out.
What they did was institute organizational change and let Theo walk on his own terms. The owner took the egg on the face (and is still taking it on the chin based on your comment). Then installed Jed to fix it. The result is manifesting in front of your eyes.
Theo’s mistake was mismanaging the baseball budget to a point of instability. A small part of that was ensuring Kris Bryant would likely never sign again with the Cubs.
Ricketts stated objective is to build a team that can sustain consistent competition. Argue how and why Ricketts should have exceeded the luxury tax to achieve that goal. Don’t tell us they are crying poor. It seems like you missed a lot of what happened if so.
I would just add the following: If you look at the picture as follows:
Tom job: build revenue sources to fund consistently good and expensive baseball teams.
Theo Job: modernize the baseball organization, develop, find, attract, and keep talent within the means Tom provides you.
Tom fulfilled his end of the bargain. And, he is expanding that with recent legislation to allow sports betting at Chicago stadiums. Tom has been involved in that work.
Edit: Tom also reimagined the area around Wrigley – which involved some annoying and heavy political lifting in Chicago politics, as well as built out a TV station.
At what point will MLB stop treating the Cardinals as a “small market” team? Their owner apparently has more wealth than the entire Steinbrenner family.
Fans of the Guardians and Athletics should definitely be pissed. Imagine how many World Series those two teams could have won in the last, say, twenty years, if their owners were actually interested in spending some of their considerable wealth on the team. In the case of the A’s in particular, where their cheapskate owner is looking to move the team if he doesn’t get to hose the city of Oakland for a new stadium, it’s even more egregious.
Correa nuts not to stay in Houston
Well, the Mets are first in something.
Mariners are down in the tidy bowl with the Pirates and Rockies and Marlins….what a joke…