Web7 wrote: ↑02 Nov 2025 15:14 pm
Bill either needs to start spendingor sell the team
You will still see people point to fluke runs years ago when the game was different. The truth is the game has a serious competitive balance issue and more than half the teams can’t just drastically increase spending to fix it. They don’t have the revenues to justify it.
Can they outspend the Dodgers? No. Can they use the hundreds of millions they receive in revenue sharing intended to create competitive balance and field a better team instead of pocketing it? Absolutely. None of these guys are poor. Every team could have a $200 million+ payroll even without great fan support and still turn an immense profit. The Dodgers and Yankees, who everyone hates, are required to pay those cheap owners for the privilege of whipping their (bleep).
See my other post in this thread where I said I support an extremely aggressive floor to get bad owners to sell. I fully agree some owners don’t invest in their team but instead pocket the revenue sharing. Those fan bases deserve better.
All of that deferred money eventually comes back to hit you. There could be a future date where the Dodgers are paying more in deferred money than the entire present payroll of about one-third of the league.
Those of you wanting a new owner, need to consider that the team will sell for about 3 Billion. Owners who buy the team can't pay that in cash and then come in with a 300 million dollar payroll. If you finance the team purchase, they will have hundreds of millions in payment and interest. If you think someone is going to buy the team for several billion and then come in and spend 300 million on salary when the team revenue is 175 million, you need to take some economics classes.
It was listed earlier, that when deferred money is included the Dodger payroll this year was over 500 million. The deferred money doesn't just disappear, it comes due at some point. The league should take action and not allow any deferred money.
Web7 wrote: ↑02 Nov 2025 15:14 pm
Bill either needs to start spendingor sell the team
Thank you
I get so sick of people like Bernie slamming anyone who dares to suggest you can walk (build a solid stream of prospects through a strong minor league system---done C. Bloom has them rated #1 via Fangraphs) and chew gum (spend money wisely to a add players you simply don't have in your system.....EX: A POWER HITTING OF or TWO!).
BDWJr better d a m n well up the payroll back to the $180+M range after the new CBA is in place or he's never going to see attendance at 3+M again.
cardstatman wrote: ↑02 Nov 2025 16:13 pm
I"m pretty sure the Cards TV money dropped from $66M (old deal) to $51M (new deal) in 2025.
That just makes your case stronger.
The $58M+ is the average of the 2025-2032 new deal. It gets higher each year. Starts at ~$51M and rises to ~$67M by 2032.
The $76M was the average of the remaining years of the old deal. Started at $65.8M in 2025 and was going to rise to $86.6M in 2032.
Thanks Cardstatman with the revised numbers. Yes , that makes the gap even wider. The Dodgers generate $334 M and DeWitt is getting $58M .
Cmon, you don't have to be a graduate of the Wharton School of Business to figure out which team has a HUGE $$$ advantage in spending .
That's the inbalance many discuss ad nauseum. Some just refuse to accept the reality .
As I understand it there are some loopholes in how tv revenues go to revenue sharing. Dodgers don’t have to share as much tv revenue going back to a deal that was cut with mlb when they were facing financial bankruptcy several years ago. Also earnings from a teams ownership percentage in tv rights is not part of shared revenue. Cards benefit from this but larger markets pocket more. Correct me if I’m wrong but loopholes need to be closed.
