STLtoday.com

rockondlouie wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:51 am

Goldfan wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:07 am Manfred will pool most local rev and share with new CBA….

Good luck getting the Dodgers to agree to share their massive $334M per year that rises to over $500M near the end of the deal!

Yankees.....$143M

Blue Jays...$100M-$150M est

I agree it should happen but these teams with massive local rights deals are going to tell ManFraud to "Go to h e l l".

But the model no longer works….something must be done. He’s on record already with that as the goal. Not sure how close he gets.

Goldfan wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:53 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:51 am

Goldfan wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:07 am Manfred will pool most local rev and share with new CBA….

Good luck getting the Dodgers to agree to share their massive $334M per year that rises to over $500M near the end of the deal!

Yankees.....$143M

Blue Jays...$100M-$150M est

I agree it should happen but these teams with massive local rights deals are going to tell ManFraud to "Go to h e l l".

But the model no longer works….something must be done. He’s on record already with that as the goal. Not sure how close he gets.

“Something must be done”

and what are the repercussions if this is not done?

45s wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:57 am

Goldfan wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:53 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:51 am

Goldfan wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:07 am Manfred will pool most local rev and share with new CBA….

Good luck getting the Dodgers to agree to share their massive $334M per year that rises to over $500M near the end of the deal!

Yankees.....$143M

Blue Jays...$100M-$150M est

I agree it should happen but these teams with massive local rights deals are going to tell ManFraud to "Go to h e l l".

But the model no longer works….something must be done. He’s on record already with that as the goal. Not sure how close he gets.

“Something must be done”

and what are the repercussions if this is not done?

Well I guess the mid to small markets become minor league feeder teams for the top 5-6 markets. Is that healthy for league?
I’m not sure what your issue is with Revenue sharing. MLB is a private franchise business….they can do whatever they want.
How does it affect you as an individual fan if most of local Revenue is shared amongst the teams? They already share 48%

Goldfan wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:53 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:51 am

Goldfan wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:07 am Manfred will pool most local rev and share with new CBA….

Good luck getting the Dodgers to agree to share their massive $334M per year that rises to over $500M near the end of the deal!

Yankees.....$143M

Blue Jays...$100M-$150M est

I agree it should happen but these teams with massive local rights deals are going to tell ManFraud to "Go to h e l l".

But the model no longer works….something must be done. He’s on record already with that as the goal. Not sure how close he gets.

No argument, it's broken

His goal is also a salary cap, another none starter w/the MLBPA.

I don't think he gets either (local media revenue sharing or salary cap)

Goldfan wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 11:03 am

45s wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:57 am

Goldfan wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:53 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:51 am

Goldfan wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:07 am Manfred will pool most local rev and share with new CBA….

Good luck getting the Dodgers to agree to share their massive $334M per year that rises to over $500M near the end of the deal!

Yankees.....$143M

Blue Jays...$100M-$150M est

I agree it should happen but these teams with massive local rights deals are going to tell ManFraud to "Go to h e l l".

But the model no longer works….something must be done. He’s on record already with that as the goal. Not sure how close he gets.

“Something must be done”

and what are the repercussions if this is not done?

Well I guess the mid to small markets become minor league feeder teams for the top 5-6 markets. Is that healthy for league?
I’m not sure what your issue is with Revenue sharing. MLB is a private franchise business….they can do whatever they want.
How does it affect you as an individual fan if most of local Revenue is shared amongst the teams? They already share 48%

Because I don’t think successful clubs should have to support failing clubs…

You want to subsidize incompetence…………

Oh poor Pittsburg and St. Louis….they suck, so let’s reward them with some of the Dodgers money…

45s wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 11:12 am

Goldfan wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 11:03 am

45s wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:57 am

Goldfan wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:53 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:51 am

Goldfan wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:07 am Manfred will pool most local rev and share with new CBA….

Good luck getting the Dodgers to agree to share their massive $334M per year that rises to over $500M near the end of the deal!

Yankees.....$143M

Blue Jays...$100M-$150M est

I agree it should happen but these teams with massive local rights deals are going to tell ManFraud to "Go to h e l l".

But the model no longer works….something must be done. He’s on record already with that as the goal. Not sure how close he gets.

“Something must be done”

and what are the repercussions if this is not done?

Well I guess the mid to small markets become minor league feeder teams for the top 5-6 markets. Is that healthy for league?
I’m not sure what your issue is with Revenue sharing. MLB is a private franchise business….they can do whatever they want.
How does it affect you as an individual fan if most of local Revenue is shared amongst the teams? They already share 48%

Because I don’t think successful clubs should have to support failing clubs…

You want to subsidize incompetence…………

Oh poor Pittsburg and St. Louis….they suck, so let’s reward them with some of the Dodgers money…

How much money would the dodgers contract be worth if they didn’t have a team to play against?? This is a LEAGUE….thats the product….

What would be the payout if the Cards took that $20 Million and placed a bet on FanDuel for the team to end up with a losing record in 2026?

todd-parker wrote: ↑05 Feb 2026 06:44 am What would be the payout if the Cards took that $20 Million and placed a bet on FanDuel for the team to end up with a losing record in 2026?

Not as good as the interest they're going to get from pocketing the money.

45s wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 11:12 am

Goldfan wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 11:03 am

45s wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:57 am

Goldfan wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:53 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:51 am

Goldfan wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:07 am Manfred will pool most local rev and share with new CBA….

Good luck getting the Dodgers to agree to share their massive $334M per year that rises to over $500M near the end of the deal!

Yankees.....$143M

Blue Jays...$100M-$150M est

I agree it should happen but these teams with massive local rights deals are going to tell ManFraud to "Go to h e l l".

But the model no longer works….something must be done. He’s on record already with that as the goal. Not sure how close he gets.

“Something must be done”

and what are the repercussions if this is not done?

Well I guess the mid to small markets become minor league feeder teams for the top 5-6 markets. Is that healthy for league?
I’m not sure what your issue is with Revenue sharing. MLB is a private franchise business….they can do whatever they want.
How does it affect you as an individual fan if most of local Revenue is shared amongst the teams? They already share 48%

Because I don’t think successful clubs should have to support failing clubs…

You want to subsidize incompetence…………

Oh poor Pittsburg and St. Louis….they suck, so let’s reward them with some of the Dodgers money…

This has nothing to do with competence and everything to do with resources. It makes no sense to have a professional sports league where one team is receiving hundreds of millions through TV revenue while others are receiving fractions. It makes it close to impossible to compete without placing extreme burdens on the teams with the resource advantage. The NBA has now done that with the second apron. You want to spend deep into the luxury tax? You lose draft picks and lose flexibility for future roster maneuvers. I’m sure many in here have opinions about the NBA, but they have constantly evolved their league structure in search of parity and as a result have a much healthier league for the long term.

45s wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 11:12 am

Goldfan wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 11:03 am

45s wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:57 am

Goldfan wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:53 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:51 am

Goldfan wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:07 am Manfred will pool most local rev and share with new CBA….

Good luck getting the Dodgers to agree to share their massive $334M per year that rises to over $500M near the end of the deal!

Yankees.....$143M

Blue Jays...$100M-$150M est

I agree it should happen but these teams with massive local rights deals are going to tell ManFraud to "Go to h e l l".

But the model no longer works….something must be done. He’s on record already with that as the goal. Not sure how close he gets.

“Something must be done”

and what are the repercussions if this is not done?

Well I guess the mid to small markets become minor league feeder teams for the top 5-6 markets. Is that healthy for league?
I’m not sure what your issue is with Revenue sharing. MLB is a private franchise business….they can do whatever they want.
How does it affect you as an individual fan if most of local Revenue is shared amongst the teams? They already share 48%

Because I don’t think successful clubs should have to support failing clubs…

You want to subsidize incompetence…………

Oh poor Pittsburg and St. Louis….they suck, so let’s reward them with some of the Dodgers money…

Way to ignore market sizes. Let’s not pretend like that’s not a huge factor. I’d hardly call the Mets a “successful” team yet they still are capable of spending however much they want. Meanwhile the Cleveland and Tampa bay can’t pay anyone and have been fairly successful all things considered.

Your argument is horribly flawed.

Jatalk wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:03 am I honestly don’t know but it just feels like the organization dropped the ball and limited their options. This has been an issue for two years or more.

Ha, always the team's fault. Their partner stopped paying them. What ball did the Cardinals drop in this case?

ZouMiz2424 wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 09:27 am https://x.com/joshjaco98/status/2019042 ... 18543?s=20

Yikes. That won't work long term

It is not a problem.
The revenue model has evolved.
The Cardinal owners have made hundreds of millions of dollars from Ballpark Village over the years and will continue to do so.
They also get a share of all the various streaming deals MLB now has in place.
20M in revenue from allowing MLB to handle their local broadcast is a drop in the bucket compared to all other revenue the team earns.
Money is not an issue.

Melville wrote: ↑05 Feb 2026 08:18 am

ZouMiz2424 wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 09:27 am https://x.com/joshjaco98/status/2019042 ... 18543?s=20

Yikes. That won't work long term

It is not a problem.
The revenue model has evolved.
The Cardinal owners have made hundreds of millions of dollars from Ballpark Village over the years and will continue to do so.
They also get a share of all the various streaming deals MLB now has in place.
20M in revenue from allowing MLB to handle their local broadcast is a drop in the bucket compared to all other revenue the team earns.
Money is not an issue.

BV is a 50/50 joint venture financed with hundreds of millions of dollars in debt in top of the tif bonds. They've made hundreds of millions? That seems ludicrous.

hofmann13 wrote: ↑05 Feb 2026 08:32 am

Melville wrote: ↑05 Feb 2026 08:18 am

ZouMiz2424 wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 09:27 am https://x.com/joshjaco98/status/2019042 ... 18543?s=20

Yikes. That won't work long term

It is not a problem.
The revenue model has evolved.
The Cardinal owners have made hundreds of millions of dollars from Ballpark Village over the years and will continue to do so.
They also get a share of all the various streaming deals MLB now has in place.
20M in revenue from allowing MLB to handle their local broadcast is a drop in the bucket compared to all other revenue the team earns.
Money is not an issue.

BV is a 50/50 joint venture financed with hundreds of millions of dollars in debt in top of the tif bonds. They've made hundreds of millions? That seems ludicrous.

I don't think you know how corporate debt works.
It allows capitalization - and drives revenue.
Healthy, managed debt is a very good thing for them.
Corporations can hold hundreds of millions of dollars in long term debt - and still produce hundreds of millions in annual revenue.
Yes - with BPV having been open for more than a decade now, the team/owner have easily realized hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue.

Jatalk wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:03 am I honestly don’t know but it just feels like the organization dropped the ball and limited their options. This has been an issue for two years or more.

Almost half of MLB was under contract with Diamond Sports, which has now gone bankrupt. MLB has stepped in to take over tv production for most of those teams. What were the Cards’ other options?

45s wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 11:12 am

Goldfan wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 11:03 am

45s wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:57 am

Goldfan wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:53 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:51 am

Goldfan wrote: ↑04 Feb 2026 10:07 am Manfred will pool most local rev and share with new CBA….

Good luck getting the Dodgers to agree to share their massive $334M per year that rises to over $500M near the end of the deal!

Yankees.....$143M

Blue Jays...$100M-$150M est

I agree it should happen but these teams with massive local rights deals are going to tell ManFraud to "Go to h e l l".

But the model no longer works….something must be done. He’s on record already with that as the goal. Not sure how close he gets.

“Something must be done”

and what are the repercussions if this is not done?

Well I guess the mid to small markets become minor league feeder teams for the top 5-6 markets. Is that healthy for league?
I’m not sure what your issue is with Revenue sharing. MLB is a private franchise business….they can do whatever they want.
How does it affect you as an individual fan if most of local Revenue is shared amongst the teams? They already share 48%

Because I don’t think successful clubs should have to support failing clubs…

You want to subsidize incompetence…………

Oh poor Pittsburg and St. Louis….they suck, so let’s reward them with some of the Dodgers money…

You mean like the way the NFL does it?