Cardinals1964 wrote: ↑22 Jan 2026 19:42 pm
Not this again.
I’m always amused by those who are so cavalier about other people’s money…
last I checked no one was whining but some fans that think the owners owe them a team with a $500 million payroll.
the idea that a business "owes" anything is amusing in itself
Unless some CT posters are FANS of the owner it’s very confusing why any FAN of a sports team would ally themselves with an owner who isn’t putting a winning entertaining product on the field for the paying customer???
a business determined what product they wish to offer….the consumer determines if they want to purchase the product
the business doesn’t “owe” anything…..and the consumer is not required to buy the product..
yet…some continue to buy an inferior product, as if the business will somehow lessen their margins out of pity for those who, for some reason, continue to buy the poor product…
Cardinals1964 wrote: ↑22 Jan 2026 19:42 pm
Not this again.
I’m always amused by those who are so cavalier about other people’s money…
last I checked no one was whining but some fans that think the owners owe them a team with a $500 million payroll.
the idea that a business "owes" anything is amusing in itself
Unless some CT posters are FANS of the owner it’s very confusing why any FAN of a sports team would ally themselves with an owner who isn’t putting a winning entertaining product on the field for the paying customer???
a business determined what product they wish to offer….the consumer determines if they want to purchase the product
the business doesn’t “owe” anything…..and the consumer is not required to buy the product..
yet…some continue to buy an inferior product, as if the business will somehow lessen their margins out of pity for those who, for some reason, continue to buy the poor product…
can’t make it up…
It’s lost on most what these pro sports civic entities are…..they’re not selling Fords or Chevys or Soda or Diapers. They’re selling a strutting peacock potential to put the chest out and pronounce that our TEAM and City is better than other TEAMS/CITIES. If the owner or management can’t maintain at least a consistent dominance providing that….then the owner needs to go. Stl Cardinals fans can’t drive to St. Charles and get their fix using their Civic Entity. BDW/Busch stadium/Cardinals is all we have with allegiances running deep through generations. So this isn’t like any other business
Youboughtit wrote: ↑22 Jan 2026 19:00 pm
Professional sports are a hobby for them. Much like hunting or any other sport for the average human. All hobbies are fun and not designed to generate profits. These owners have hundreds of businesses that generate their wealth. I think if you asked any of them prior to buying a team that is how they envisioned it. I beleive what changes is 30 smart guys get it a room and it changes from sport to business. All of the sudden every one of them wants to be the “smartest guy in the room”. Until that changes the fans pay the freight. MLB has an ownership problem except a few at the top.
Loosing $100m per season on a hobby that value increases $200m should not be a problem
This has been my focus too in another thread.
I'm not carrying billionaires water for them when they're the one's who've caused this problem by handing out stupid contracts to good but not great players and insane amounts of money (Ohtani/Soto) to the stars.
The one thing I do want to see capped though is deferred money which has given the Dodgers a huge advantage that the Guggenheim guys have beautifully exploited.
Other than that I'm not holding a pity party for any billionaire owners.
JMO
Even that seems ok to me considering the huge growth in franchise value. It is increasing more than interest would so the Dodgers for example are just using the Billions of dollars the franchise will be worth after winning 5-10 more WS now
Youboughtit wrote: ↑22 Jan 2026 19:00 pm
Professional sports are a hobby for them. Much like hunting or any other sport for the average human. All hobbies are fun and not designed to generate profits. These owners have hundreds of businesses that generate their wealth. I think if you asked any of them prior to buying a team that is how they envisioned it. I beleive what changes is 30 smart guys get it a room and it changes from sport to business. All of the sudden every one of them wants to be the “smartest guy in the room”. Until that changes the fans pay the freight. MLB has an ownership problem except a few at the top.
Loosing $100m per season on a hobby that value increases $200m should not be a problem
This has been my focus too in another thread.
I'm not carrying billionaires water for them when they're the one's who've caused this problem by handing out stupid contracts to good but not great players and insane amounts of money (Ohtani/Soto) to the stars.
The one thing I do want to see capped though is deferred money which has given the Dodgers a huge advantage that the Guggenheim guys have beautifully exploited.
Other than that I'm not holding a pity party for any billionaire owners.
JMO
Even that seems ok to me considering the huge growth in franchise value. It is increasing more than interest would so the Dodgers for example are just using the Billions of dollars the franchise will be worth after winning 5-10 more WS now
I don't believe there is any direct relationship between winning championships and the ultimate value of a team.
For example, the Dallas Cowboys are still the highest valued sports franchise ($13 billion) and they haven't won a Super Bowl since 1996.
Youboughtit wrote: ↑22 Jan 2026 19:00 pm
Professional sports are a hobby for them. Much like hunting or any other sport for the average human. All hobbies are fun and not designed to generate profits. These owners have hundreds of businesses that generate their wealth. I think if you asked any of them prior to buying a team that is how they envisioned it. I beleive what changes is 30 smart guys get it a room and it changes from sport to business. All of the sudden every one of them wants to be the “smartest guy in the room”. Until that changes the fans pay the freight. MLB has an ownership problem except a few at the top.
Loosing $100m per season on a hobby that value increases $200m should not be a problem
This has been my focus too in another thread.
I'm not carrying billionaires water for them when they're the one's who've caused this problem by handing out stupid contracts to good but not great players and insane amounts of money (Ohtani/Soto) to the stars.
The one thing I do want to see capped though is deferred money which has given the Dodgers a huge advantage that the Guggenheim guys have beautifully exploited.
Other than that I'm not holding a pity party for any billionaire owners.
JMO
Even that seems ok to me considering the huge growth in franchise value. It is increasing more than interest would so the Dodgers for example are just using the Billions of dollars the franchise will be worth after winning 5-10 more WS now
I don't believe there is any direct relationship between winning championships and the ultimate value of a team.
For example, the Dallas Cowboys are still the highest valued sports franchise ($13 billion) and they haven't won a Super Bowl since 1996.
The Los Angeles Dodgers are one of MLB's most valuable franchises, with recent valuations placing them around $6.8 billion to $7.7 billion in 2025, typically second only to the New York Yankees. Their significant value comes from massive revenue generation (over $1 billion in 2024),
Their franchise increased more than double any other team last year.
Youboughtit wrote: ↑22 Jan 2026 19:00 pm
Professional sports are a hobby for them. Much like hunting or any other sport for the average human. All hobbies are fun and not designed to generate profits. These owners have hundreds of businesses that generate their wealth. I think if you asked any of them prior to buying a team that is how they envisioned it. I beleive what changes is 30 smart guys get it a room and it changes from sport to business. All of the sudden every one of them wants to be the “smartest guy in the room”. Until that changes the fans pay the freight. MLB has an ownership problem except a few at the top.
Loosing $100m per season on a hobby that value increases $200m should not be a problem
They must not see it the same as you.
Some rather large companies balk at paying minimum wage
let alone millions to play a game.
Cardinals1964 wrote: ↑22 Jan 2026 19:42 pm
Not this again.
I’m always amused by those who are so cavalier about other people’s money…
last I checked no one was whining but some fans that think the owners owe them a team with a $500 million payroll.
the idea that a business "owes" anything is amusing in itself
Unless some CT posters are FANS of the owner it’s very confusing why any FAN of a sports team would ally themselves with an owner who isn’t putting a winning entertaining product on the field for the paying customer???
Cardinals1964 wrote: ↑22 Jan 2026 19:42 pm
Not this again.
I’m always amused by those who are so cavalier about other people’s money…
last I checked no one was whining but some fans that think the owners owe them a team with a $500 million payroll.
the idea that a business "owes" anything is amusing in itself
Unless some CT posters are FANS of the owner it’s very confusing why any FAN of a sports team would ally themselves with an owner who isn’t putting a winning entertaining product on the field for the paying customer???
Youboughtit wrote: ↑22 Jan 2026 19:00 pm
Professional sports are a hobby for them. Much like hunting or any other sport for the average human. All hobbies are fun and not designed to generate profits. These owners have hundreds of businesses that generate their wealth. I think if you asked any of them prior to buying a team that is how they envisioned it. I beleive what changes is 30 smart guys get it a room and it changes from sport to business. All of the sudden every one of them wants to be the “smartest guy in the room”. Until that changes the fans pay the freight. MLB has an ownership problem except a few at the top.
Loosing $100m per season on a hobby that value increases $200m should not be a problem
Tell us you don’t understand economics without telling us you don’t understand economics
Cardinals1964 wrote: ↑22 Jan 2026 19:42 pm
Not this again.
I’m always amused by those who are so cavalier about other people’s money…
There’s a recent umpteen page thread on this same subject. Nothing will be solved here. Got people that can’t pay their rent, telling billionaires how to spend money.
Hey it’s all on them. If they don’t want to spend let them continue to loose $ and cut payroll again and again until the franchise also starts to loose $. No new taxpayer $ for stadium upgrades. Then in 20 years see where it’s at. It’s their choice. Spend for attendance or let the sport die.
The sport is dying anyways.
When people would rather watch fake, scripted, baseball played to Backstreet Boys music in cutoff uniforms and between pitch dances over the genuine article, you have a very serious problem.
Cardinals1964 wrote: ↑22 Jan 2026 19:42 pm
Not this again.
I’m always amused by those who are so cavalier about other people’s money…
There’s a recent umpteen page thread on this same subject. Nothing will be solved here. Got people that can’t pay their rent, telling billionaires how to spend money.
Hey it’s all on them. If they don’t want to spend let them continue to loose $ and cut payroll again and again until the franchise also starts to loose $. No new taxpayer $ for stadium upgrades. Then in 20 years see where it’s at. It’s their choice. Spend for attendance or let the sport die.
It won’t die. I like the thought of seeing in 20 years. A guaranteed 20 year life contract. I’ll take it.
Maybe the MLB will resemble AAA and then there will be 10 real MLB teams in a champions bracket like soccer. Either way there won’t be a salary cap until those top 10 marbles allow full revenue sharing so the cap and floor can be calculate correctly
How would you suggest that a floor works? A suggestion of a floor is quite silly. That’s what the minimum wage is for. How can a team be forced to spend a minimum if the available players aren’t worth it or they don’t want to sign with you?
Currently every team is getting approx $130m annually from the general fund. Several owners are pocketing it as their profit instead of spending on payroll. For the top markets to pay more revenue sharing they want a guarantee it is spent on players. If you cutting the top of market then the growth for the MLBPA has to come from the small markets spending more. The owners have no power to force a cap. Growth is at all time high and a labor stoppage would stop that. A lockout to force a cap won’t happen. 60-% of players are millionaires and the ones in charge of the MLBPA are the richest.
How do you figure the owners have no power to force a cap?
Cardinals1964 wrote: ↑22 Jan 2026 19:42 pm
Not this again.
I’m always amused by those who are so cavalier about other people’s money…
There’s a recent umpteen page thread on this same subject. Nothing will be solved here. Got people that can’t pay their rent, telling billionaires how to spend money.
Hey it’s all on them. If they don’t want to spend let them continue to loose $ and cut payroll again and again until the franchise also starts to loose $. No new taxpayer $ for stadium upgrades. Then in 20 years see where it’s at. It’s their choice. Spend for attendance or let the sport die.
It won’t die. I like the thought of seeing in 20 years. A guaranteed 20 year life contract. I’ll take it.
Maybe the MLB will resemble AAA and then there will be 10 real MLB teams in a champions bracket like soccer. Either way there won’t be a salary cap until those top 10 marbles allow full revenue sharing so the cap and floor can be calculate correctly
How would you suggest that a floor works? A suggestion of a floor is quite silly. That’s what the minimum wage is for. How can a team be forced to spend a minimum if the available players aren’t worth it or they don’t want to sign with you?
Currently every team is getting approx $130m annually from the general fund. Several owners are pocketing it as their profit instead of spending on payroll. For the top markets to pay more revenue sharing they want a guarantee it is spent on players. If you cutting the top of market then the growth for the MLBPA has to come from the small markets spending more. The owners have no power to force a cap. Growth is at all time high and a labor stoppage would stop that. A lockout to force a cap won’t happen. 60-% of players are millionaires and the ones in charge of the MLBPA are the richest.
I’m misreading what you are saying or you are wrong.
Luxury tax total was $402 million. So, no. Teams aren’t getting $130 each.
Half of the luxury tax goes to fund player benefits (pension, health care).
Where are you coming up with you’re $130 million?
That half of $402 plus national TV contract and MLBtv streaming plus shared gate and metrchandise all goes into general fund and distributed 30 ways. It was reported $130m last year. This may help
Key Components of MLB Payments & Funds:
Revenue Sharing: Provides significant annual income, estimated at over $100M per team from national sources plus local shares.
Deferred Compensation: Clubs pay players over time, often using league-facilitated financing, with significant deferrals a key part of large contracts (e.g., Ohtani).
League Loans: MLB has provided loans to teams, especially during tough economic times (like 2020-2021), with repayment terms debated but generally expected from larger market clubs.
Player Benefits: Funds also go towards pension plans and special benefits for former players who didn't fully vest.
Last year this payment alone was $130m
That adds clarity. Even more reason to not worry about the owners going broke. But since not knowing any teams true revenue once you deduct all salaries and minor leagues, who knows. I don’t care. I just wanna watch a game.
Cardinals1964 wrote: ↑22 Jan 2026 19:42 pm
Not this again.
I’m always amused by those who are so cavalier about other people’s money…
last I checked no one was whining but some fans that think the owners owe them a team with a $500 million payroll.
the idea that a business "owes" anything is amusing in itself
Unless some CT posters are FANS of the owner it’s very confusing why any FAN of a sports team would ally themselves with an owner who isn’t putting a winning entertaining product on the field for the paying customer???
Maybe because they’re business owners themselves on a smaller scale, but understand what the owners deal with on a day to day and year to year basis as an owner.
Cardinals1964 wrote: ↑22 Jan 2026 19:42 pm
Not this again.
I’m always amused by those who are so cavalier about other people’s money…
There’s a recent umpteen page thread on this same subject. Nothing will be solved here. Got people that can’t pay their rent, telling billionaires how to spend money.
Hey it’s all on them. If they don’t want to spend let them continue to loose $ and cut payroll again and again until the franchise also starts to loose $. No new taxpayer $ for stadium upgrades. Then in 20 years see where it’s at. It’s their choice. Spend for attendance or let the sport die.
It won’t die. I like the thought of seeing in 20 years. A guaranteed 20 year life contract. I’ll take it.
Maybe the MLB will resemble AAA and then there will be 10 real MLB teams in a champions bracket like soccer. Either way there won’t be a salary cap until those top 10 marbles allow full revenue sharing so the cap and floor can be calculate correctly
How would you suggest that a floor works? A suggestion of a floor is quite silly. That’s what the minimum wage is for. How can a team be forced to spend a minimum if the available players aren’t worth it or they don’t want to sign with you?
3 other leagues have figured it out without a problem. There are only so many roster spots so players will have to sign elsewhere whether they want to or not.
3 other leagues with a cap and floor has punished middle journeyman talent.
Pay your top talent as much as you can. Pay your lesser talent as little as possible. No room for journeymen.
Why would I pay a utility guy $10 million to make the floor when I could pay a rookie $1 million? I’d save $9 million to go after higher level talent. This is a real problem in one of the other major sports.
Cardinals1964 wrote: ↑22 Jan 2026 19:42 pm
Not this again.
I’m always amused by those who are so cavalier about other people’s money…
There’s a recent umpteen page thread on this same subject. Nothing will be solved here. Got people that can’t pay their rent, telling billionaires how to spend money.
Hey it’s all on them. If they don’t want to spend let them continue to loose $ and cut payroll again and again until the franchise also starts to loose $. No new taxpayer $ for stadium upgrades. Then in 20 years see where it’s at. It’s their choice. Spend for attendance or let the sport die.
It won’t die. I like the thought of seeing in 20 years. A guaranteed 20 year life contract. I’ll take it.
Maybe the MLB will resemble AAA and then there will be 10 real MLB teams in a champions bracket like soccer. Either way there won’t be a salary cap until those top 10 marbles allow full revenue sharing so the cap and floor can be calculate correctly
How would you suggest that a floor works? A suggestion of a floor is quite silly. That’s what the minimum wage is for. How can a team be forced to spend a minimum if the available players aren’t worth it or they don’t want to sign with you?
Currently every team is getting approx $130m annually from the general fund. Several owners are pocketing it as their profit instead of spending on payroll. For the top markets to pay more revenue sharing they want a guarantee it is spent on players. If you cutting the top of market then the growth for the MLBPA has to come from the small markets spending more. The owners have no power to force a cap. Growth is at all time high and a labor stoppage would stop that. A lockout to force a cap won’t happen. 60-% of players are millionaires and the ones in charge of the MLBPA are the richest.
I’m misreading what you are saying or you are wrong.
Luxury tax total was $402 million. So, no. Teams aren’t getting $130 each.
Half of the luxury tax goes to fund player benefits (pension, health care).
Where are you coming up with you’re $130 million?
That half of $402 plus national TV contract and MLBtv streaming plus shared gate and metrchandise all goes into general fund and distributed 30 ways. It was reported $130m last year. This may help
Key Components of MLB Payments & Funds:
Revenue Sharing: Provides significant annual income, estimated at over $100M per team from national sources plus local shares.
Deferred Compensation: Clubs pay players over time, often using league-facilitated financing, with significant deferrals a key part of large contracts (e.g., Ohtani).
League Loans: MLB has provided loans to teams, especially during tough economic times (like 2020-2021), with repayment terms debated but generally expected from larger market clubs.
Player Benefits: Funds also go towards pension plans and special benefits for former players who didn't fully vest.
Last year this payment alone was $130m
That adds clarity. Even more reason to not worry about the owners going broke. But since not knowing any teams true revenue once you deduct all salaries and minor leagues, who knows. I don’t care. I just wanna watch a game.
Salaries and minor leagues?
You think that’s all they pay for?
Substitute all salaries with expenses. Better now?
