Dodgers 2024 Estimated Revenue

[Jatalk]

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.

I tried to point out in another thread what you have said so well. Their spending expands their brand. They are just smarter and better ran than other MLB teams.

[sikeston bulldog2]

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.

I tried to point out in another thread what you have said so well. Their spending expands their brand. They are just smarter and better ran than other MLB teams.

True.

[12xu]

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.

I tried to point out in another thread what you have said so well. Their spending expands their brand. They are just smarter and better ran than other MLB teams.

True.

AND, more importantly, they have advantages which few other franchises can hope to enjoy.

[opti mist]

grok has no clue.

copilot: Here’s a clear, evidence‑based estimate grounded directly in the search results you triggered.

## **Estimated 2024 Revenue for the Los Angeles Dodgers**

Two independent sources give us solid numbers:

### **1. Forbes 2025 Valuation (covers 2024 season)**
Forbes lists the Dodgers’ **2024 revenue as \$752 million**.

This figure is *net of revenue sharing and stadium debt service*, meaning it reflects the money the team actually kept after required league payments.

### **2. Sportico / Big Lead Report**
A separate report states the Dodgers **grossed over \$1 billion in revenue** in 2024.

This number is *before* revenue sharing and luxury tax payments. The article notes:
- Dodgers became only the fourth team ever to surpass **\$1B in gross revenue**.
- They paid **around \$150M in revenue sharing** and **\$103M in luxury tax**.

### **Reconciling the Numbers**
These two figures describe **different revenue definitions**:

| Metric | Amount | Source | Notes |
|-------|--------|--------|-------|
| **Gross revenue** | **≈ \$1.0B** | Sportico / Big Lead | Before revenue sharing & taxes |
| **Net revenue** | **\$752M** | Forbes | After revenue sharing & stadium debt service |

### **Best Estimate**
If the question is simply “How much revenue did the Dodgers generate in 2024?”:

**Gross revenue: ~\$1.0 billion**
**Net revenue: \$752 million**

Both are correct depending on which accounting definition you want.

Opti

[DwaininAztec]

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.

My idea stands. Not only sharing attendance revenue with visiting teams, but also splitting TV/streaming revenue/radio revenue with visiting teams. Home team retains 60% of attendance and TV/streaming revenue/radio revenue while sharing 40%. Same goes for TV/streaming revenue/radio revenue of the visiting team. Visiting team shares 40% of their revenue with the home team and keeps 60%.

I know, the rich teams will say no, and devise ways around it, but if there is to be a MLB in 20 years it will have to happen.