Dodgers 2024 Estimated Revenue

[opti mist]

From Grok: The Los Angeles Dodgers set a historic benchmark in 2024 by becoming the first MLB team to generate $1 billion in gross revenue (before revenue sharing), according to multiple reports from Sportico and other sources.

This milestone was driven by factors including:
A strong local TV deal (Spectrum SportsNet LA, worth around $300–350 million annually).
Record-breaking attendance (nearly 4 million fans, leading MLB, with per-game ticket revenue around $4.3 million).
Surging sponsorships, boosted by Shohei Ohtani's arrival (adding tens of millions in incremental deals from Japanese brands).
Postseason success (World Series win) and overall business growth.

Opri

[WaltsSuccessor]

And that’s why they don’t blink at a $400m payroll and $169 luxury tax. Even if the revenue estimate is $200m too high, they still made a killing.

[renostl]

And that’s why they don’t blink at a $400m payroll and $169 luxury tax. Even if the revenue estimate is $200m too high, they still made a killing.

Not bad getting revenue from two other countries (Mex too) plus being in one
of this country's largest and more expensive markets.

[renostl]

And that’s why they don’t blink at a $400m payroll and $169 luxury tax. Even if the revenue estimate is $200m too high, they still made a killing.

$88 per fan in attendance

[alw80]

grok has no clue.

[ScotchMIrish]

From Grok: The Los Angeles Dodgers set a historic benchmark in 2024 by becoming the first MLB team to generate $1 billion in gross revenue (before revenue sharing), according to multiple reports from Sportico and other sources.

This milestone was driven by factors including:
A strong local TV deal (Spectrum SportsNet LA, worth around $300–350 million annually).
Record-breaking attendance (nearly 4 million fans, leading MLB, with per-game ticket revenue around $4.3 million).
Surging sponsorships, boosted by Shohei Ohtani's arrival (adding tens of millions in incremental deals from Japanese brands).
Postseason success (World Series win) and overall business growth.

Opri

Thanks for posting that. I think the Cardinals tv deal is estimated at around $50 million.

[ICCFIM2]

Thank you for the post. If that is true, then my comment on the other thread to take draft picks from a high spending team may help provide some competitive balance. But, higher luxury taxes will not help at all because the Dodgers revenue is so much higher, they can spend through the tax and it won't matter to them. Draft picks might. If they don't because they can out spend that cost, at least the other teams have a bit more talent they can use in the uphill fight.

Previously I thought the Dodgers were in the $600-700M range. A billion is a whole different stratosphere.

[renostl]

Thank you for the post. If that is true, then my comment on the other thread to take draft picks from a high spending team may help provide some competitive balance. But, higher luxury taxes will not help at all because the Dodgers revenue is so much higher, they can spend through the tax and it won't matter to them. Draft picks might. If they don't because they can out spend that cost, at least the other teams have a bit more talent they can use in the uphill fight.

Previously I thought the Dodgers were in the $600-700M range. A billion is a whole different stratosphere.

MLB owners are stubborn and there's an overpowered union.
A cap will never happen nor will revenue sharing.
I have the feeling that this tax system and a salary floor combination
is the better combination to get worked out.

Maybe draft picks work.
However, if a team can't get talent through youth and prospects aren't you playing into
what they have a superior advantage at?
Some team will always be on top and spending when they do fine their advantages are shared.
Currently LAD has it. I'm not sure that's forever. Japan has helped them a lot.
Teams at the top shouldn't have to subsidize a team that refuse to spend either.
Make the penalties mean other teams can bid on MLB talent vs prospect talent that
after the first round has a 1 in 4 or 5 chance of making an impact.

[ICCFIM2]

Thank you for the post. If that is true, then my comment on the other thread to take draft picks from a high spending team may help provide some competitive balance. But, higher luxury taxes will not help at all because the Dodgers revenue is so much higher, they can spend through the tax and it won't matter to them. Draft picks might. If they don't because they can out spend that cost, at least the other teams have a bit more talent they can use in the uphill fight.

Previously I thought the Dodgers were in the $600-700M range. A billion is a whole different stratosphere.

MLB owners are stubborn and there's an overpowered union.
A cap will never happen nor will revenue sharing.
I have the feeling that this tax system and a salary floor combination
is the better combination to get worked out.

Maybe draft picks work.
However, if a team can't get talent through youth and prospects aren't you playing into
what they have a superior advantage at?
Some team will always be on top and spending when they do fine their advantages are shared.
Currently LAD has it. I'm not sure that's forever. Japan has helped them a lot.
Teams at the top shouldn't have to subsidize a team that refuse to spend either.
Make the penalties mean other teams can bid on MLB talent vs prospect talent that
after the first round has a 1 in 4 or 5 chance of making an impact.

What is the floor? I thought the penalty was supposed to have these teams bid on MLB talent. But with this disparity, the talent they are bidding on are not in the same universe. I understand prospects have a low probability of success. But, if you are effectively eliminating the top 4-5 spenders from the top 4 rounds of the draft permanently, that has to negatively impact their competitiveness at some point right? The Cardinals certainly point to their donut hole in the draft arising out of their scandal as a reason for the current issues.

[renostl]

Thank you for the post. If that is true, then my comment on the other thread to take draft picks from a high spending team may help provide some competitive balance. But, higher luxury taxes will not help at all because the Dodgers revenue is so much higher, they can spend through the tax and it won't matter to them. Draft picks might. If they don't because they can out spend that cost, at least the other teams have a bit more talent they can use in the uphill fight.

Previously I thought the Dodgers were in the $600-700M range. A billion is a whole different stratosphere.

MLB owners are stubborn and there's an overpowered union.
A cap will never happen nor will revenue sharing.
I have the feeling that this tax system and a salary floor combination
is the better combination to get worked out.

Maybe draft picks work.
However, if a team can't get talent through youth and prospects aren't you playing into
what they have a superior advantage at?
Some team will always be on top and spending when they do fine their advantages are shared.
Currently LAD has it. I'm not sure that's forever. Japan has helped them a lot.
Teams at the top shouldn't have to subsidize a team that refuse to spend either.
Make the penalties mean other teams can bid on MLB talent vs prospect talent that
after the first round has a 1 in 4 or 5 chance of making an impact.

What is the floor? I thought the penalty was supposed to have these teams bid on MLB talent. But with this disparity, the talent they are bidding on are not in the same universe. I understand prospects have a low probability of success. But, if you are effectively eliminating the top 4-5 spenders from the top 4 rounds of the draft permanently, that has to negatively impact their competitiveness at some point right? The Cardinals certainly point to their donut hole in the draft arising out of their scandal as a reason for the current issues.

Elimination from 4 rounds is far different than the current.
I didn't see that in the above proposal.

I don't claim to have an answer when the more obvious of revenue sharing seems off
of the table. Caps have their own issues. I just envision those teams spending perpetually.

It's an uneven system when one geographical area can balk at a $10.00 a month increase in
a TV broadcast and the other spends that on a beer and has 6 times the population in just the
surrounding area.

[ICCFIM2]

Thank you for the post. If that is true, then my comment on the other thread to take draft picks from a high spending team may help provide some competitive balance. But, higher luxury taxes will not help at all because the Dodgers revenue is so much higher, they can spend through the tax and it won't matter to them. Draft picks might. If they don't because they can out spend that cost, at least the other teams have a bit more talent they can use in the uphill fight.

Previously I thought the Dodgers were in the $600-700M range. A billion is a whole different stratosphere.

MLB owners are stubborn and there's an overpowered union.
A cap will never happen nor will revenue sharing.
I have the feeling that this tax system and a salary floor combination
is the better combination to get worked out.

Maybe draft picks work.
However, if a team can't get talent through youth and prospects aren't you playing into
what they have a superior advantage at?
Some team will always be on top and spending when they do fine their advantages are shared.
Currently LAD has it. I'm not sure that's forever. Japan has helped them a lot.
Teams at the top shouldn't have to subsidize a team that refuse to spend either.
Make the penalties mean other teams can bid on MLB talent vs prospect talent that
after the first round has a 1 in 4 or 5 chance of making an impact.

What is the floor? I thought the penalty was supposed to have these teams bid on MLB talent. But with this disparity, the talent they are bidding on are not in the same universe. I understand prospects have a low probability of success. But, if you are effectively eliminating the top 4-5 spenders from the top 4 rounds of the draft permanently, that has to negatively impact their competitiveness at some point right? The Cardinals certainly point to their donut hole in the draft arising out of their scandal as a reason for the current issues.

Elimination from 4 rounds is far different than the current.
I didn't see that in the above proposal.

I don't claim to have an answer when the more obvious of revenue sharing seems off
of the table. Caps have their own issues. I just envision those teams spending perpetually.

It's an uneven system when one geographical area can balk at a $10.00 a month increase in
a TV broadcast and the other spends that on a beer and has 6 times the population in just the
surrounding area.

That pretty much sums up the issue. If the Dodgers can spend $500M+ perpetually. (With the luxury tax they did that in 2025) And the Cards spending tops out at $200-225M, absent some other mechanism to shift more talent to the Cards and all the other teams at the level of spending of the Cards, the playing field will be tilted forever. It will occasionally be overturned when a team drafts a generational talent like Pujols, albeit, in the current situation, I doubt Pujols would have agreed to the extension that he did. So the Pujols era would have ended after 2006 instead of 2011.

[renostl]

Thank you for the post. If that is true, then my comment on the other thread to take draft picks from a high spending team may help provide some competitive balance. But, higher luxury taxes will not help at all because the Dodgers revenue is so much higher, they can spend through the tax and it won't matter to them. Draft picks might. If they don't because they can out spend that cost, at least the other teams have a bit more talent they can use in the uphill fight.

Previously I thought the Dodgers were in the $600-700M range. A billion is a whole different stratosphere.

MLB owners are stubborn and there's an overpowered union.
A cap will never happen nor will revenue sharing.
I have the feeling that this tax system and a salary floor combination
is the better combination to get worked out.

Maybe draft picks work.
However, if a team can't get talent through youth and prospects aren't you playing into
what they have a superior advantage at?
Some team will always be on top and spending when they do fine their advantages are shared.
Currently LAD has it. I'm not sure that's forever. Japan has helped them a lot.
Teams at the top shouldn't have to subsidize a team that refuse to spend either.
Make the penalties mean other teams can bid on MLB talent vs prospect talent that
after the first round has a 1 in 4 or 5 chance of making an impact.

What is the floor? I thought the penalty was supposed to have these teams bid on MLB talent. But with this disparity, the talent they are bidding on are not in the same universe. I understand prospects have a low probability of success. But, if you are effectively eliminating the top 4-5 spenders from the top 4 rounds of the draft permanently, that has to negatively impact their competitiveness at some point right? The Cardinals certainly point to their donut hole in the draft arising out of their scandal as a reason for the current issues.

Elimination from 4 rounds is far different than the current.
I didn't see that in the above proposal.

I don't claim to have an answer when the more obvious of revenue sharing seems off
of the table. Caps have their own issues. I just envision those teams spending perpetually.

It's an uneven system when one geographical area can balk at a $10.00 a month increase in
a TV broadcast and the other spends that on a beer and has 6 times the population in just the
surrounding area.

That pretty much sums up the issue. If the Dodgers can spend $500M+ perpetually. (With the luxury tax they did that in 2025) And the Cards spending tops out at $200-225M, absent some other mechanism to shift more talent to the Cards and all the other teams at the level of spending of the Cards, the playing field will be tilted forever. It will occasionally be overturned when a team drafts a generational talent like Pujols, albeit, in the current situation, I doubt Pujols would have agreed to the extension that he did. So the Pujols era would have ended after 2006 instead of 2011.

The Pujols issue is ok though. It's up to the management to maintain the product.
The LAD leveraged Ohtani and all the revenue streams he brought, kudos. Neither is forever
unless maintained.
St. Louis can punch well above its weight. The LA group is crazy about championships.
They slip a little the numbers drop faster.

Thanks for the clarification and the dialog.

[cardsrmyteam]

While the Dodgers were investing in expanding their brand, Bill and Mo were trying to get gambling at the stadium. Two very different plans that have resulted in great disparity in revenue that the Cardinals will never be able to compete with.

[renostl]

While the Dodgers were investing in expanding their brand, Bill and Mo were trying to get gambling at the stadium. Two very different plans that have resulted in great disparity in revenue that the Cardinals will never be able to compete with.

What would expanding their brand have looked like?
They tried and got burned with Ballys. Regional sports networks have
stung the industry.

LAD began the Mexico expansion back in Fernando days.
Ohtani is unique maybe Toronto could have done similar or
more. LA has a leg up over several MLB cities.

[CCard]

You spend all that time and effort to draft, maybe get lucky, then train and support young talent. You get a few years of MLB service time until they start to get expensive. Don't fret you can trade that talent away to the Dodgers and Yankees of the world and watch them star in the playoffs and championships while you start the process all over again. This is sick. If something isn't done then baseball will cease to be relevant for much of the league.

[sikeston bulldog2]

You spend all that time and effort to draft, maybe get lucky, then train and support young talent. You get a few years of MLB service time until they start to get expensive. Don't fret you can trade that talent away to the Dodgers and Yankees of the world and watch them star in the playoffs and championships while you start the process all over again. This is sick. If something isn't done then baseball will cease to be relevant for much of the league.

Good write. Especially- the cycle. Draft develop debut move on. Then what. Start over, or trade them before they exit stage left.