OT: Arby's closes more locations

[Goldfan]

They are Forbes' numbers, and the only source I'm aware of for comparable numbers for all 30 MLB teams.

BTW, per your 2nd link, $8 billion in profit over a decade for 30 teams would be ~$27 million a year, per team.

Doesn't change the facts. Anyway you slice it. I posted the Forbes link. Read it.

Your're right, it doesn't change the facts. The Forbes numbers show the following for each team's average "operating income" (as close a number to "profits" as we're going to have) over 2015-2024:

The average if you include the Mets is +$17.5 million. The average if you exclude the Mets is +$20.8 million.

Boston - +$63 million
Cubs - +$59
San Francisco - +$48
Pittsburgh - +$44
Houston - +$42
Atlanta - +$38
Milwaukee - +$33
Seattle - +$33
Baltimore - +$32
Cleveland - +$31
Tampa Bay - +$29
Philadelphia - +$28
Angels - +$27
St. Louis - +$27
Texas - +$21
______________________Median & Avg. w/o Mets of $20.8 million
Washington - +$20
______________________Avg. with Mets of $17.5 million
Arizona - +$16
Kansas City - +$15
Cincinnati - +$13
Dodgers - +$10
Minnesota - +$9
White Sox - +$6
Athletics - +$6
Colorado - $0
Detroit - -$1
Miami - -$4
San Diego - -$6
Yankee - -$14
Toronto - -$22
Mets - -$79

No, "Operating Income" is not as close to "Profits" as you can get. That's moronic. Tell me, if teams are that close to the bone then why would any team sign a $30 million dollar player, let alone multiple and yet they do. How do you explain that?

How Forbes calculates "operating income" is as close a measure as we have for "profits."

Again, your own Forbes link - which stated that the 30 MLB teams made $8 billion in "profits" over the decade from 2010-2019 works out to an average of $27 million per team per year, which is completely in line with the numbers above.

Then how does the Forbes article say they made $350 million in profits? Again, there's a difference in operating expenses and profits.

It's not "operating expenses." No one, anywhere, has said "operating expenses."

Forbes term is "operating income." That is what is as close as we're going to get to "profits."

I don't know where you read "$350 million." It was either, maybe, the total "profits" they made over a decade (so $35 million a year), not annual. Or else you read annual "revenue" (which for the Cardinals has been right around $350 million) as "profits."

Your premise is so silly it makes me gasp for breath. If that were the scenario then no team would sign a player for 30 million dollars or they'd be instantly losing money. Does that make any sense to you? Operating cost is expenses, Not Profit! Think about it.

Can you not read - the Forbes quantity is "operating INCOME."

Read the headline from your own **** article, which was written in May 2020:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbadenh ... ince-2010/

MLB Owners Cry Hardship. Our Numbers Show They’ve Made $8 Billion In Profit Since 2010.

$8 billion in "profit" for 30 teams over ten years (2010-2019) is an average of $27 million per team per year. It's simple math.

And, yes, apparently if a number of teams just went out and net added a $30 million player on top of what they have already budgeted for their MLB payroll, they would go from a slight profit to a slight loss (if revenue remained unchanged).

In 2024, the average revenue for Major League Baseball teams was approximately $378 million, with the New York Yankees generating the highest revenue at $679 million. The Los Angeles Dodgers followed closely, earning $549 million in the same year.


How Much Revenue Did MLB Generate in 2024?

Figures reflect official reporting, financial disclosures, and industry estimates to provide the most accurate picture of MLB’s total economic output.

The MLB generated $12.1 billion in total revenue during 2024, setting a new all-time record for the league.
The average MLB team earned about $386 million in 2023, though the gap between large and small markets remains wide.
MLB’s $12 billion economy now exceeds the GDP of more than 50 countries, underscoring how global the business of baseball has become.
League revenue has grown 264 percent since 2000, fueled by media deals, licensing, and stadium investments.
The MLB welcomed 70.75 million fans in 2023, the first time attendance topped 70 million since 2018.
From 2020 to 2024, total revenue jumped 70 percent, highlighting baseball’s rebound from the pandemic.
About 85 percent of MLB revenue is local—from ticket sales, concessions, and regional TV—while only 15 percent comes from national sources.
The league’s overall growth rate since 1970 averages around 11 percent per year.

https://www.docsports.com/2025/mlb-fina ... stics.html


Do you see how silly you are now? Please read and learn.

"Revenue" is not deducting for expenses. You are confusing gross revenue with profit.

As I said before, the Cardinals "revenue" is about $350 million per year, but their total operating expenses are apparently about $325 million per year, so they have an annual "operating income" or "profit" of about $25 million per year.

Once more, if you take interest, principal reduction, and payments to cover tax liabilities of the members, you have a number you can work with. If you want to do the math, assuming the 7% of value as the total debt, use prime and assume a 20 year amortization schedule to give you the money available to cover the members’ federal and state tax liabilities.

As I posted several times…..the stadium debt service is taken out BEFORE Rev and therefore BEFORE Operating Profit in the Forbes calculation

[Goldfan]

Cranny the financial statement being discussed in this thread are from Forbes. I’ve forwarded their equations for the numbers listed in the MLB team valuation report that’s been posted several times. If you don’t want to educate yourself to comment within the parameters of the report then don’t included yourself in the conversation. You intentionally insert false information.

[mattmitchl44]

Again I hear what is being said about potentially taking other factors into account to adjust Forbes "operating income" into something more precise to call "profit."

However, since we have to guess at values for those other factors, I don't think it is insightful to do so.

IMO, just comparing teams based on Forbes "operating income" is basically going to be as good as we can do here.

[VegasVinny]

Only on Cards Talk will you find a heated debate over fast-food roast beef and the intricacies of financial accounting in the same thread. Well done. 10/10. Happy new year.

[sikeston bulldog2]

Only on Cards Talk will you find a heated debate over fast-food roast beef and the intricacies of financial accounting in the same thread. Well done. 10/10. Happy new year.

I’ve eaten at Arby’s twice since this thread’s inception. 20 miles away.

[imyourhuckleberry]

Only on Cards Talk will you find a heated debate over fast-food roast beef and the intricacies of financial accounting in the same thread. Well done. 10/10. Happy new year.

I’ve eaten at Arby’s twice since this thread’s inception. 20 miles away.

And spent most of the rest of the time in the bathroom, no doubt.

[Cranny]

Cranny the financial statement being discussed in this thread are from Forbes. I’ve forwarded their equations for the numbers listed in the MLB team valuation report that’s been posted several times. If you don’t want to educate yourself to comment within the parameters of the report then don’t included yourself in the conversation. You intentionally insert false information.

No, Goldfan, I submit information the way accountants would look at it. If Forbes wants to say it's after debt service of the building, then you have to know what kind of line of credit (on a revolver basis) is used to get through the off season, when all the employees get paid. Interest on that needs to be deducted from what they call "operating income". Then they would have to cover the federal and state tax liabilities of the members.

[sikeston bulldog2]

Only on Cards Talk will you find a heated debate over fast-food roast beef and the intricacies of financial accounting in the same thread. Well done. 10/10. Happy new year.

I’ve eaten at Arby’s twice since this thread’s inception. 20 miles away.

And spent most of the rest of the time in the bathroom, no doubt.

No issue. Now those curly fries, hmmm.

[Goldfan]

Cranny the financial statement being discussed in this thread are from Forbes. I’ve forwarded their equations for the numbers listed in the MLB team valuation report that’s been posted several times. If you don’t want to educate yourself to comment within the parameters of the report then don’t included yourself in the conversation. You intentionally insert false information.

No, Goldfan, I submit information the way accountants would look at it. If Forbes wants to say it's after debt service of the building, then you have to know what kind of line of credit (on a revolver basis) is used to get through the off season, when all the employees get paid. Interest on that needs to be deducted from what they call "operating income". Then they would have to cover the federal and state tax liabilities of the members.

Whatever methodology you want to apply it still doesn’t change the fact that if the Yank, Mets, are showing a negative Operating Income # and the Dodgers have a 20mil Op Income and Cards have been around 50-60mil then BDW’s number is LARGER off of a much smaller revenue #. However your accountant brain wants to work the Forbes list is comparing apples to apples.

[OldRed]

There are some things I may understand about finances, not everything, but I do understand you can't spend more than you have coming in or you could end up in bad shape financially.

[Cranny]

Cranny the financial statement being discussed in this thread are from Forbes. I’ve forwarded their equations for the numbers listed in the MLB team valuation report that’s been posted several times. If you don’t want to educate yourself to comment within the parameters of the report then don’t included yourself in the conversation. You intentionally insert false information.

No, Goldfan, I submit information the way accountants would look at it. If Forbes wants to say it's after debt service of the building, then you have to know what kind of line of credit (on a revolver basis) is used to get through the off season, when all the employees get paid. Interest on that needs to be deducted from what they call "operating income". Then they would have to cover the federal and state tax liabilities of the members.

Whatever methodology you want to apply it still doesn’t change the fact that if the Yank, Mets, are showing a negative Operating Income # and the Dodgers have a 20mil Op Income and Cards have been around 50-60mil then BDW’s number is LARGER off of a much smaller revenue #. However your accountant brain wants to work the Forbes list is comparing apples to apples.

Very good question on operating losses, Goldfan, no matter how it's calculated. You'd have to read other team's operating agreements to know how they cover the losses. Or maybe because of the total value of the asset(s), banks make loans to cover the losses.

[imetsatchelpaige]

Only on Cards Talk will you find a heated debate over fast-food roast beef and the intricacies of financial accounting in the same thread. Well done. 10/10. Happy new year.

I’ve eaten at Arby’s twice since this thread’s inception. 20 miles away.

And spent most of the rest of the time in the bathroom, no doubt.

My first meal at Arby’s was in 1980. It was also my last meal at Arby’s.
Despite all the speeches about how great we are, Americans rank somewhere around 55th in life expectancy in the world.
55. No kidding.
Eating fast food and the processed food diet is a primary reason why.
And I’m not even discussing the environmental consequences.
Garbage from a nutritional perspective.

[Cranny]

Cranny the financial statement being discussed in this thread are from Forbes. I’ve forwarded their equations for the numbers listed in the MLB team valuation report that’s been posted several times. If you don’t want to educate yourself to comment within the parameters of the report then don’t included yourself in the conversation. You intentionally insert false information.

No, Goldfan, I submit information the way accountants would look at it. If Forbes wants to say it's after debt service of the building, then you have to know what kind of line of credit (on a revolver basis) is used to get through the off season, when all the employees get paid. Interest on that needs to be deducted from what they call "operating income". Then they would have to cover the federal and state tax liabilities of the members.

Whatever methodology you want to apply it still doesn’t change the fact that if the Yank, Mets, are showing a negative Operating Income # and the Dodgers have a 20mil Op Income and Cards have been around 50-60mil then BDW’s number is LARGER off of a much smaller revenue #. However your accountant brain wants to work the Forbes list is comparing apples to apples.

I can prepare apples to apples. The Cardinals remain in a cash flow positive position by cutting expenses while revenues decrease.

[Goldfan]

Cranny the financial statement being discussed in this thread are from Forbes. I’ve forwarded their equations for the numbers listed in the MLB team valuation report that’s been posted several times. If you don’t want to educate yourself to comment within the parameters of the report then don’t included yourself in the conversation. You intentionally insert false information.

No, Goldfan, I submit information the way accountants would look at it. If Forbes wants to say it's after debt service of the building, then you have to know what kind of line of credit (on a revolver basis) is used to get through the off season, when all the employees get paid. Interest on that needs to be deducted from what they call "operating income". Then they would have to cover the federal and state tax liabilities of the members.

Whatever methodology you want to apply it still doesn’t change the fact that if the Yank, Mets, are showing a negative Operating Income # and the Dodgers have a 20mil Op Income and Cards have been around 50-60mil then BDW’s number is LARGER off of a much smaller revenue #. However your accountant brain wants to work the Forbes list is comparing apples to apples.

I can prepare apples to apples. The Cardinals remain in a cash flow positive position by cutting expenses while revenues decrease.

Cranny I have a financial problem for you:
How many $12 cups of beer does it take to pay the St. Louis Cardinals LLC partners taxes??

[zuck698]

13 pages and no has pointed out one huge concern with these Arby's closings. Will Shady keep his job? Sorry, had to. Now back to the scheduled programming already in progress.

[mattmitchl44]

Cranny the financial statement being discussed in this thread are from Forbes. I’ve forwarded their equations for the numbers listed in the MLB team valuation report that’s been posted several times. If you don’t want to educate yourself to comment within the parameters of the report then don’t included yourself in the conversation. You intentionally insert false information.

No, Goldfan, I submit information the way accountants would look at it. If Forbes wants to say it's after debt service of the building, then you have to know what kind of line of credit (on a revolver basis) is used to get through the off season, when all the employees get paid. Interest on that needs to be deducted from what they call "operating income". Then they would have to cover the federal and state tax liabilities of the members.

Whatever methodology you want to apply it still doesn’t change the fact that if the Yank, Mets, are showing a negative Operating Income # and the Dodgers have a 20mil Op Income and Cards have been around 50-60mil then BDW’s number is LARGER off of a much smaller revenue #. However your accountant brain wants to work the Forbes list is comparing apples to apples.

Again, over the 10 years from 2015-2024, the Cardinals average "operating income" was $27 million per year, about $5-$10 million per year more than MLB median/average.