STLtoday.com

rockondlouie wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 11:38 am

Cranny wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 11:33 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 11:08 am

Cranny wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 09:45 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 08:54 am Cardinals Valuation/$2.55B, Revenues/$395M and Net Profit/$34M in 2024.

Plus only 7% Debt as % of value.

Yet BDWJr sought to slash as much payroll as he could this offseason while adding only one major league player, P. Maton at $2M.


CNBC’s Official MLB Team Valuations 2025: Here’s how the 30 franchises stack up

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/04/11/cnbcs-o ... -2025.html

Cash flow is a better gauge than net profit. What's 7% of $2.55 Billion? Debt service that, including any principal reduction required by the banks each year.

Huh

Cash Flow is simply the movement of money in and out of the business, are you trying to act like the Cardinals are cash poor?

New structure is to give younger players playing time and strengthen the minor league development system. That’s very defensible.

Young players?

Other than VSII it's virtually the same roster as 2024.

Very true, so instead of bringing in older players on 1 or 2 year FA contracts, they decided to continue the developmental process of Herrera, Winn, Nootbaar, Scott, Walker, Burleson, Saggese, Gorman, etc. The next wave will be pitching, with Liberatore, Pallante, Mathews, McGreevy, Roby, Hence, Hjerpe, Robberse, etc.

The owners of the Cardinal and separately the Ballpark Village are still paying for construction of those two facilities. Remember the Cardinals built their own park with the state and city paying for infrastructure costs.

Also what has been lost in most of the discussions is the 20M loss in the TV/Cable contract. That along with the uncertainty of that contract has played into the situation. Then add in the uncertainty of the next players contract, and the FO is being very conservative in its actions.

Finally, a full implementation of building the team from the inside has affected the present and near future roster cost. DeWitt has said that the FO hopes to return to a 180M to 200M MLB roster cost in the future as the the younger players mature and additional players are added.

In the mean time, the team has been playing some exciting games.

DwaininAztec wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 12:03 pm The owners of the Cardinal and separately the Ballpark Village are still paying for construction of those two facilities. Remember the Cardinals built their own park with the state and city paying for infrastructure costs.

Also what has been lost in most of the discussions is the 20M loss in the TV/Cable contract. That along with the uncertainty of that contract has played into the situation. Then add in the uncertainty of the next players contract, and the FO is being very conservative in its actions.

Finally, a full implementation of building the team from the inside has affected the present and near future roster cost. DeWitt has said that the FO hopes to return to a 180M to 200M MLB roster cost in the future as the the younger players mature and additional players are added.

In the mean time, the team has been playing some exciting games.

Very good post.

DwaininAztec wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 12:03 pm The owners of the Cardinal and separately the Ballpark Village are still paying for construction of those two facilities. Remember the Cardinals built their own park with the state and city paying for infrastructure costs.

Also what has been lost in most of the discussions is the 20M loss in the TV/Cable contract. That along with the uncertainty of that contract has played into the situation. Then add in the uncertainty of the next players contract, and the FO is being very conservative in its actions.

Finally, a full implementation of building the team from the inside has affected the present and near future roster cost. DeWitt has said that the FO hopes to return to a 180M to 200M MLB roster cost in the future as the the younger players mature and additional players are added.

In the mean time, the team has been playing some exciting games.

They lost more than $20MM on their media deal. They had equity in the network, they probably lost their (donkey) on it.

The revenue in the CNBC report is from baseball operations. Concessions are a separate corporation.
Also, the huge amount of MLB licensing $$ is not included in the baseball operations P+L.

rockondlouie wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 11:20 am

Cranny wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 10:43 am

Rojo Johnson wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 09:56 am

Cranny wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 09:45 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 08:54 am Cardinals Valuation/$2.55B, Revenues/$395M and Net Profit/$34M in 2024.

Plus only 7% Debt as % of value.

Yet BDWJr sought to slash as much payroll as he could this offseason while adding only one major league player, P. Maton at $2M.


CNBC’s Official MLB Team Valuations 2025: Here’s how the 30 franchises stack up

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/04/11/cnbcs-o ... -2025.html

Cash flow is a better gauge than net profit. What's 7% of $2.55 Billion? Debt service that, including any principal reduction required by the banks each year.

Can you explain this a little better? What’s 7% of the present value of the franchise have to do this?

Interest is deductible on an income statement.
But any principal reduction required by the banks
isn’t.

Multiple 7% times a value of $3.55 billion and it will tell you what the principal of the debt is.
How much they owe the banks. Only on the cash flow statement would it show principal reduction required by the banks.

So any poster who only talks about net profit doesn’t totally understand accounting and the difference between an income statement and a cash flow statement.

Nice job poser, can't even get the numbers right.

He typed the wrong number, but is more or less accurate on everything else. As a former commercial banker you know that...

Cranny wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 11:57 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 11:38 am

Cranny wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 11:33 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 11:08 am

Cranny wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 09:45 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 08:54 am Cardinals Valuation/$2.55B, Revenues/$395M and Net Profit/$34M in 2024.

Plus only 7% Debt as % of value.

Yet BDWJr sought to slash as much payroll as he could this offseason while adding only one major league player, P. Maton at $2M.


CNBC’s Official MLB Team Valuations 2025: Here’s how the 30 franchises stack up

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/04/11/cnbcs-o ... -2025.html

Cash flow is a better gauge than net profit. What's 7% of $2.55 Billion? Debt service that, including any principal reduction required by the banks each year.

Huh

Cash Flow is simply the movement of money in and out of the business, are you trying to act like the Cardinals are cash poor?

New structure is to give younger players playing time and strengthen the minor league development system. That’s very defensible.

Young players?

Other than VSII it's virtually the same roster as 2024.

Very true, so instead of bringing in older players on 1 or 2 year FA contracts, they decided to continue the developmental process of Herrera, Winn, Nootbaar, Scott, Walker, Burleson, Saggese, Gorman, etc. The next wave will be pitching, with Liberatore, Pallante, Mathews, McGreevy, Roby, Hence, Hjerpe, Robberse, etc.

Then why keep M. Mikolas, possibly the worst SP in MLB for over two years?

Just DFA him and give the ball to McGreevy.

hofmann13 wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 12:28 pm

rockondlouie wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 11:20 am

Cranny wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 10:43 am

Rojo Johnson wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 09:56 am

Cranny wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 09:45 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 08:54 am Cardinals Valuation/$2.55B, Revenues/$395M and Net Profit/$34M in 2024.

Plus only 7% Debt as % of value.

Yet BDWJr sought to slash as much payroll as he could this offseason while adding only one major league player, P. Maton at $2M.


CNBC’s Official MLB Team Valuations 2025: Here’s how the 30 franchises stack up

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/04/11/cnbcs-o ... -2025.html

Cash flow is a better gauge than net profit. What's 7% of $2.55 Billion? Debt service that, including any principal reduction required by the banks each year.

Can you explain this a little better? What’s 7% of the present value of the franchise have to do this?

Interest is deductible on an income statement.
But any principal reduction required by the banks
isn’t.

Multiple 7% times a value of $3.55 billion and it will tell you what the principal of the debt is.
How much they owe the banks. Only on the cash flow statement would it show principal reduction required by the banks.

So any poster who only talks about net profit doesn’t totally understand accounting and the difference between an income statement and a cash flow statement.

Nice job poser, can't even get the numbers right.

He typed the wrong number, but is more or less accurate on everything else. As a former commercial banker you know that...

Just yanking his chain hoff

(But w/o audited statements none of us really knows how accurate)

Cranny wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 10:43 am

Rojo Johnson wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 09:56 am

Cranny wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 09:45 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 08:54 am Cardinals Valuation/$2.55B, Revenues/$395M and Net Profit/$34M in 2024.

Plus only 7% Debt as % of value.

Yet BDWJr sought to slash as much payroll as he could this offseason while adding only one major league player, P. Maton at $2M.


CNBC’s Official MLB Team Valuations 2025: Here’s how the 30 franchises stack up

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/04/11/cnbcs-o ... -2025.html

Cash flow is a better gauge than net profit. What's 7% of $2.55 Billion? Debt service that, including any principal reduction required by the banks each year.

Can you explain this a little better? What’s 7% of the present value of the franchise have to do this?

Interest is deductible on an income statement.
But any principal reduction required by the banks
isn’t.

Multiple 7% times a value of $3.55 billion and it will tell you what the principal of the debt is.
How much they owe the banks. Only on the cash flow statement would it show principal reduction required by the banks.

So any poster who only talks about net profit doesn’t totally understand accounting and the difference between an income statement and a cash flow statement.

I sure don't know accounting and don't try to be an ecoonomics guy .. I had Econ 101 in my Social Science area minor in college . So that is VERY limited. Still remember my first 'pop quiz' in Econ class . Questions 1 What does GNP mean ? Aced that test lol

I'm not sure I see the relevance of principal reduction in this discussion (particularly at a low 7% Debt/TEV)--that's a cap structure choice, not an exogenous variable.

JDW wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 11:11 am So a 7% debt on your total valuation is extremely low. Every time you decrease your principal on your loan you own that much more % of your asset, so it's not an expense as it balances on your net value. I would guess the Cards have had plenty of chances to lock in low interest rates over the years.
In my business, I locked in a 2.95% a few years ago for the life of the loan. I could pay if off easily anytime , but at 2.95% why would I want to when before the tariff madness, you could do multiple times better than that elsewhere. Think I have 20 years or so left on the loan if I never pay ahead. Also having the interest deduction helps reduce some on the income side. Many businesses create a lot of expenses to help mask how high their net income could be.
The easy conclusion, Cards are in great shape financially. Are they preparing for the potential lockout? Are they extremely conservative? Where is winning on their priority list?

I'd say you were on the money on 2 counts 1-prepping for a lockout or walk out 2- very conservative. Winning is probably no better then 2nd on their priority list. Profit first then winning.

Couple of things come to mind, one Ballpark Village is probably operated as a seperate entity. So profit/loss or liabities on that side may not be showing in CNBC report. Also remember, the Cardinals books are not open for review, so the numbers are CNBC's best guess. When you are talking about guessing the numbers on a $2+B business, even a small mistake in your estimate can mean the difference between $34m profit and $10m dollar profit.

hofmann13 wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 12:28 pm

rockondlouie wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 11:20 am

Cranny wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 10:43 am

Rojo Johnson wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 09:56 am

Cranny wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 09:45 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 08:54 am Cardinals Valuation/$2.55B, Revenues/$395M and Net Profit/$34M in 2024.

Plus only 7% Debt as % of value.

Yet BDWJr sought to slash as much payroll as he could this offseason while adding only one major league player, P. Maton at $2M.


CNBC’s Official MLB Team Valuations 2025: Here’s how the 30 franchises stack up

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/04/11/cnbcs-o ... -2025.html

Cash flow is a better gauge than net profit. What's 7% of $2.55 Billion? Debt service that, including any principal reduction required by the banks each year.

Can you explain this a little better? What’s 7% of the present value of the franchise have to do this?

Interest is deductible on an income statement.
But any principal reduction required by the banks
isn’t.

Multiple 7% times a value of $3.55 billion and it will tell you what the principal of the debt is.
How much they owe the banks. Only on the cash flow statement would it show principal reduction required by the banks.

So any poster who only talks about net profit doesn’t totally understand accounting and the difference between an income statement and a cash flow statement.

Nice job poser, can't even get the numbers right.

He typed the wrong number, but is more or less accurate on everything else. As a former commercial banker you know that...

What's the wrong number?

ramfandan wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 13:10 pm

Cranny wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 10:43 am

Rojo Johnson wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 09:56 am

Cranny wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 09:45 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 08:54 am Cardinals Valuation/$2.55B, Revenues/$395M and Net Profit/$34M in 2024.

Plus only 7% Debt as % of value.

Yet BDWJr sought to slash as much payroll as he could this offseason while adding only one major league player, P. Maton at $2M.


CNBC’s Official MLB Team Valuations 2025: Here’s how the 30 franchises stack up

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/04/11/cnbcs-o ... -2025.html

Cash flow is a better gauge than net profit. What's 7% of $2.55 Billion? Debt service that, including any principal reduction required by the banks each year.

Can you explain this a little better? What’s 7% of the present value of the franchise have to do this?

Interest is deductible on an income statement.
But any principal reduction required by the banks
isn’t.

Multiple 7% times a value of $3.55 billion and it will tell you what the principal of the debt is.
How much they owe the banks. Only on the cash flow statement would it show principal reduction required by the banks.

So any poster who only talks about net profit doesn’t totally understand accounting and the difference between an income statement and a cash flow statement.

I sure don't know accounting and don't try to be an ecoonomics guy .. I had Econ 101 in my Social Science area minor in college . So that is VERY limited. Still remember my first 'pop quiz' in Econ class . Questions 1 What does GNP mean ? Aced that test lol

My last Econ class was Econ 373 - Calculus based Microeconomic Theory. It was a beast.

NYCardsFan wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 13:18 pm I'm not sure I see the relevance of principal reduction in this discussion (particularly at a low 7% Debt/TEV)--that's a cap structure choice, not an exogenous variable.

Principal reduction may be the requirement of the lender. Gotta love exogenous variables, though! LOL.

rockondlouie wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 08:54 am Cardinals Valuation/$2.55B, Revenues/$395M and Net Profit/$34M in 2024.

Plus only 7% Debt as % of value.

Yet BDWJr sought to slash as much payroll as he could this offseason while adding only one major league player, P. Maton at $2M.


CNBC’s Official MLB Team Valuations 2025: Here’s how the 30 franchises stack up

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/04/11/cnbcs-o ... -2025.html

Curious what that does and doesn’t include in terms of revenue. Corporate shells are fun

Cranny wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 13:47 pm

NYCardsFan wrote: ↑11 Apr 2025 13:18 pm I'm not sure I see the relevance of principal reduction in this discussion (particularly at a low 7% Debt/TEV)--that's a cap structure choice, not an exogenous variable.

Principal reduction may be the requirement of the lender. Gotta love exogenous variables, though! LOL.

Principal reduction may indeed be a requirement of the existing debt instrument(s), but you are putting form before substance by fixating on the possible mechanics of the current debt instrument(s), rather than the economic and financial context. Do you really believe there is only one lender in the entire universe that will do business with the Cardinals? Do you really believe the current lenders wouldn't refi the debt if the Cardinals wanted to? The terms of the current debt instrument(s) are what they are, but the universe of available financing options involves choice (at least in this situation, with a paltry 7% Debt/TEV and basically bullet-proof collateral).

Principal payments at this point are a decision by Cardinals ownership. If we assume, for the sake of simplicity, that the debt is roughly at par, the estimate of 7% of TEV would imply $179mm of debt outstanding. Principal payments, as you suggested, would indeed be a cash outflow below the EBITDA line, but doing so would also increase the value of the equity almost one-for-one (assuming zero tax effects for the moment to simplify the analysis). The Cardinals could easily refinance $179mm of debt if they wanted to and defer any principal repayment (professional sports teams are like gold as collateral, and the team is under-levered), but if they choose to instead pay down principal under whatever current debt agreement(s) they have in place, they are simply using available cash to pay down debt and increase the value of their equity (just as allowing cash to pile up on the balance sheet would decrease NET debt and increase equity value in the same way). As a snapshot of financial health, that doesn't necessarily mean that ownership is cash poor, it just means they're making a conscious decision about capital structure and uses of available cash.

But, as another poster pointed out, some of the changes in the revenue forecast (and potentially in forward expenses) could change the team's run-rate financial picture materially going forward. Those changes (and the potential for a future lockout) wouldn't affect the CNBC snapshot estimate from the article, but they might cause ownership to select a more conservative cap structure for the time being. But to be clear, that would be a conscious choice, not an "exogenous variable." "LOL"