PDA

View Full Version : How the heck are the Reds going to afford this?



RedEye
04-05-2012, 10:48 PM
So we all know about this (http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120402&content_id=27839372&vkey=news_cin&c_id=cin). And now there is this (http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120405&content_id=27982028&vkey=news_cin&c_id=cin).

Castellini assures us that they can do it, that it's risky, and that that's "the environment we live in."

People are speculating all over the place -- about how the Reds have gone insane (http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/blog/jon-heyman/18279494/four-explanations-for-225m-votto-extension-one-of-the-nuttiest-deals-ever), about how they might not have (http://thebiglead.com/index.php/2012/04/04/a-defense-of-the-joey-votto-contract-extension/), about how this signals a paradigm shift (http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/joey-vottos-massive-extension-changes-the-game/) and about how we can't complain anymore (http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/blog/eye-on-baseball/18304273/with-joey-vottos-new-contract-no-more-cries-of-poverty-from-reds), among other things.

So... I'm pooling together the collective brainpower of RedsZone here to ask the question again, and to answer it in our own way:

How the heck are the Reds going to afford this?

kaldaniels
04-05-2012, 10:51 PM
How much could the Reds spend on payroll without going in the red? That is a starting point to being able to answer this.

Tom Servo
04-05-2012, 10:52 PM
Bob won the Mega Millions?

RedEye
04-05-2012, 11:04 PM
We're doing great so far! :D

RedEye
04-05-2012, 11:07 PM
How much could the Reds spend on payroll without going in the red? That is a starting point to being able to answer this.

Obviously, I don't know. But I'm starting to think that Castellini might be another Mike Ilitch... because unless he's dipping into his salad-making millions, I have no idea where this money is coming from. Sure, the cable TV contract will be renegotiated in a few years -- but is that really going to account for enough dough to make both the Votto and BP signings possible, let alone the other deals that will be required to field a team around them? I'm praying that the answer is "yes" -- but I have to admit all of this spending has me a bit shell shocked.

savafan
04-05-2012, 11:28 PM
I don't know exactly how the Luxury Tax system works, so bear with me, but does Votto's contract raise the Luxury Tax threshold to such a point that teams like the Yankees would have to pay more in, thus more money spread around to the other market clubs from that pool?

LegallyMinded
04-05-2012, 11:33 PM
How much could the Reds spend on payroll without going in the red? That is a starting point to being able to answer this.

Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/mlb-valuations/list/#p_1_s_d6_) calculates the Reds Operating Income as 17.1 million dollars. That's before paying for taxes and interest and so on, and I'm not sure how direct the correlation between player salaries and operating income is, but it seems like the Reds have at least some room to increase payroll without going in the red.

savafan
04-05-2012, 11:36 PM
Who are the current limited or minority partners in the ownership stake of the Reds?

Tom Servo
04-05-2012, 11:43 PM
Maybe Bob found a treasure chest buried at the Riverfront Stadium location filled with unmarked bills and Nazi armbands?

REDREAD
04-05-2012, 11:57 PM
Maybe Bob found a treasure chest buried at the Riverfront Stadium location filled with unmarked bills and Nazi armbands?

Yep, maybe he found the giant money bin that Carl had hidden there during all the lean years of "Breaking even"

Honestly.. Marge spent every cent she could to make the team win.. At the time, the Reds had one of the higher payrolls in baseball.. It's a different era, that's true, but honestly I think a lot of these "small markets" have been sandbagging.. Looks like we finally have an owner that actually wants to win. I am thrilled :)

RedsManRick
04-06-2012, 12:02 AM
Let's enjoy the party and worry about the hangover tomorrow.

corkedbat
04-06-2012, 12:09 AM
This could be part of the answer:

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94558

RedEye
04-06-2012, 12:13 AM
This could be part of the answer:

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94558

Ah, good deal. I had heard rumors that $100 million was in the cards, but had never seen your post. Well, that would make more sense then.

RedEye
04-06-2012, 12:30 AM
Let's enjoy the party and worry about the hangover tomorrow.

Sorry to be a wet blanket, Rick. I enjoy a party as much as the next guy, but this is starting to feel like one of those parties where people are taking shots and chasing them indiscriminately with malt liquor. I'm worried it is going to end much sooner -- and messier -- than we realize right now. :eek:

Okay... what the heck... Toga! Toga! Toga! :beerme:

kaldaniels
04-06-2012, 12:40 AM
My how the course of this franchise has changed in the past 5 days.

757690
04-06-2012, 01:56 AM
When Busch sold the Cardinals, the new owners went on a spending spree, and eveyone wondered how they could make any money, even in a bigger market. Their argument was that if the Cardinals contend each year, they will make enough money to pay for their increase in spending.

It seems like they were right. And remember, Cast was part of that group.

AtomicDumpling
04-06-2012, 03:14 AM
The Reds have been making huge profits every year since BCast bought the team and even before that. He could pay off Votto's entire new contract in advance if he wanted to with the profit he has already made on the Reds. The Reds, like all other MLB teams, are cash cows for their billionaire owners. That is why the franchise values continue to soar even during a deep recession.

The owners that have struggled financially (like McCourt of the Dodgers and Wilpon of the Mets) lost tons of money on their other businesses and investments, then pillaged cash from their team to keep themselves afloat. The teams themselves were making hefty profits both in cash and equity.

The Reds are already making big profits. Once you factor in the expected large increases in media contracts and revenue sharing it is easy to see why the Reds will have a payroll of $100+ million and growing in the coming years. By the end of Votto's contract the Reds could have a payroll well over $150 million. The Reds payroll has doubled over the last 10 years and is likely to double again in the next 10 years.

traderumor
04-06-2012, 07:12 AM
Maybe Bob found a treasure chest buried at the Riverfront Stadium location filled with unmarked bills and Nazi armbands?
He had a big find after buying a locker in Celebrity Storage Wars :) Pete Rose Hall of Fame Weekend t-shirts?

Dan
04-06-2012, 07:16 AM
OK, if you increase payroll by $25 million/yr, but your franchise is increasing in value at a rate of $50 million/yr because of that, then essentially what you're doing is getting a 100% return on your investment. Even if the value only increases $30 million/yr, that comes out to a 20% return per year. That's something most businessmen would kill for.

MikeS21
04-06-2012, 08:09 AM
I go back to the models we have seen from other teams. The Marlins spent big and won it all in 1997, then had to dismantle the team in 1998 because their WS victory didn't bring in fans. The Arizona Diamondbacks spent big and won it all in 2001, and LOST money to the point that they had to sell off players and the roster was unrecognizable by 2003. The Marlins came back in 2003 and won again. And sank back into oblivion in 2004. The Marlins spent a boatload of money this off-season, but I have a feeling it won't draw enough fans and by July, we could see a fire sale in Miami.

I do not want to see this team win the 2012 World Series then have to unload because the money is not there to keep these players who won. I know what it is like to have the home team in the World Series four times in seven seasons with the BRM, and I want to see that again. But the realities of baseball economics are always going to favor the bigger market teams.

Caveat Emperor
04-06-2012, 08:38 AM
The Reds have been making huge profits every year since BCast bought the team and even before that.

Source? I wasn't aware any MLB teams opened their books up.

membengal
04-06-2012, 08:46 AM
The Reds signing Votto means I no longer have to care/worry about it. The point is, they apparently CAN, or they would not have.

Now I get to focus on rooting for my favorite baseball team and no longer have to worry over their unknown bottom line.

I may be happier for that than I am for them retaining Votto. And I am super-happy they get to keep Votto.

redsmetz
04-06-2012, 08:48 AM
Yesterday's game was the highest attendance for a regular season game. I'm not sure that will be sustained, but it was heartening to see.

I don't know if this means anything, but I was surprised on Tuesday when the split the pot amount was nearly $1500 with a crowd just under 13,000. Yesterday's Split the Pot was around five grand, a number I've never seen at a Reds game. There were alot of people there yesterday and they were spending money (caveat - yes, I know the other half of the pot does not go into operating revenues; it goes to the Community Fund). Spending money, not just on the StP, but on concessions (lines were enormous).

There is some added excitement with all of the off-season moves, with the Votto extension and probably with a Phillips extension. And I don't have a sense we're looking at a Marlins model. I'm thinking Castellini and company have plugged in the numbers and have a good sense of how to make this all work. We'll see.

medford
04-06-2012, 08:59 AM
Thing is, the Reds didn't spend big this offseason, payroll was more or less in line w/ expectations. Sure they locked themselves into some big financial payouts 4 years from now w/ Votto, but for the immediate future (the next 4 seasons) they're well positioned w/ players like Votto, Bruce, Cueto, Latos, Meseraco, Stubbs, Cozart, Marshall, etc... all locked into reasonable contract, league minimum contracts or early arbitration numbers. The way they structured the Votto deal gives them 4 years to establish a winning identity which should lead to more fans in the stands, and larger revenue streams from merchandising, TV & radio rights, advertising dollars, etc... Everything's risky by nature of injury, but how many better bets are there in baseball than Votto to build around? How many of those "other" bets would have been available to the Reds the way Votto has been for negotiations. I know there is a lot of your typical player's talk, but it feels like both Bruce & Votto are interested in being the cornerstone's for this franchise.

Aside from all that, how much money is each team expecting from the increased playoffs? How long will it take for them to move from a 1 game format to a 3 game format, increasing those revenue's even more? How much money will the Reds net by hosting the All Star game? How much money was Carl Linder and the rest of the previous ownership group pulling out of the Reds each season, vs how much the current ownership group want are pulling out? Was Linder looking to make significan coin, while perhaps Bob just wants to break even?

Bob didn't get rich by being stupid, he's had several years to get a handle on the team's revenue and an insight into future projections. Its not just the Reds, but it seems like all over the landscape baseball is doing well, huge contracts are being dished out. What makes St Louis and Milawaukee all that much different than Cincy? Why do we accept that St Louis and the Brewers can handle a $100 mil payroll and not question it, but Cincy is forever stuck in the small market mentality. Bob is betting that Cincy can become a strong baseball town again. We may never be the Yankees or Boston, but if they're smart, extend the right guys, build up the system, use prospects for proven talent and turn some of the prospects into solid regulars for the Reds they can certainly position themselves into regular contention.

HokieRed
04-06-2012, 09:02 AM
If we have the kind of inflation necessary to keep the government's debt/leverage moderately under control over the next decade, what will a 28 year old Joey Votto model cost in 2023? Halfway into this contract, Joey could look like a steal.

bucksfan2
04-06-2012, 09:05 AM
I go back to the models we have seen from other teams. The Marlins spent big and won it all in 1997, then had to dismantle the team in 1998 because their WS victory didn't bring in fans. The Arizona Diamondbacks spent big and won it all in 2001, and LOST money to the point that they had to sell off players and the roster was unrecognizable by 2003. The Marlins came back in 2003 and won again. And sank back into oblivion in 2004. The Marlins spent a boatload of money this off-season, but I have a feeling it won't draw enough fans and by July, we could see a fire sale in Miami.

I do not want to see this team win the 2012 World Series then have to unload because the money is not there to keep these players who won. I know what it is like to have the home team in the World Series four times in seven seasons with the BRM, and I want to see that again. But the realities of baseball economics are always going to favor the bigger market teams.

In 1997 the iPod was still a couple of years off into the future. In 2003 the iPod was just getting going. Apple took a back seat to Microsoft, Dell, and Gateway. My my how things have changed in the years since.

If the Reds win the 2012 WS I don't really care what they do for an encore. But I do think that there are various revenue streams that are available to current baseball teams that weren't even thought of years ago. There is the MLB network, MLB TV deals that have skyrocketed, satellite Radio, streaming aps, etc. Further technological advances will only line the owners pockets even more.

I guess I don't see any harm for Bob and the Reds to spend more money. If anything its a nice surprise based upon the prior managements penny pinching philosophy.

Benihana
04-06-2012, 09:09 AM
Thing is, the Reds didn't spend big this offseason, payroll was more or less in line w/ expectations. Sure they locked themselves into some big financial payouts 4 years from now w/ Votto, but for the immediate future (the next 4 seasons) they're well positioned w/ players like Votto, Bruce, Cueto, Latos, Meseraco, Stubbs, Cozart, Marshall, etc... all locked into reasonable contract, league minimum contracts or early arbitration numbers. The way they structured the Votto deal gives them 4 years to establish a winning identity which should lead to more fans in the stands, and larger revenue streams from merchandising, TV & radio rights, advertising dollars, etc... Everything's risky by nature of injury, but how many better bets are there in baseball than Votto to build around? How many of those "other" bets would have been available to the Reds the way Votto has been for negotiations. I know there is a lot of your typical player's talk, but it feels like both Bruce & Votto are interested in being the cornerstone's for this franchise.

Aside from all that, how much money is each team expecting from the increased playoffs? How long will it take for them to move from a 1 game format to a 3 game format, increasing those revenue's even more? How much money will the Reds net by hosting the All Star game? How much money was Carl Linder and the rest of the previous ownership group pulling out of the Reds each season, vs how much the current ownership group want are pulling out? Was Linder looking to make significan coin, while perhaps Bob just wants to break even?

Bob didn't get rich by being stupid, he's had several years to get a handle on the team's revenue and an insight into future projections. Its not just the Reds, but it seems like all over the landscape baseball is doing well, huge contracts are being dished out. What makes St Louis and Milawaukee all that much different than Cincy? Why do we accept that St Louis and the Brewers can handle a $100 mil payroll and not question it, but Cincy is forever stuck in the small market mentality. Bob is betting that Cincy can become a strong baseball town again. We may never be the Yankees or Boston, but if they're smart, extend the right guys, build up the system, use prospects for proven talent and turn some of the prospects into solid regulars for the Reds they can certainly position themselves into regular contention.

Great post. Add in inflation and ever-increasing TV and revenue splits, and you can see what Cast was thinking. This is the closest the Reds have come to recreating the BRM since the BRM. Keeping these guys around is probably the only and certainly the best chance we have to sustaining long-term success in Cincinnati.

lollipopcurve
04-06-2012, 09:16 AM
I don't really care if they run the team in the red so long as the team is good and fans are responding. Ownership has plenty of dough and they'll make a profit when they sell anyway (though I would like to see this ownership group --Castellini/Williams -- control the team for a long time). What would bother me is if fans do not respond. This is the ownership group and the team Cincinnati has been waiting for. Now, it's up to the fans to show that Cincinnati remains the baseball town history says it is.

_Sir_Charles_
04-06-2012, 09:19 AM
Yesterday's game was the highest attendance for a regular season game. I'm not sure that will be sustained, but it was heartening to see.

I don't know if this means anything, but I was surprised on Tuesday when the split the pot amount was nearly $1500 with a crowd just under 13,000. Yesterday's Split the Pot was around five grand, a number I've never seen at a Reds game. There were alot of people there yesterday and they were spending money (caveat - yes, I know the other half of the pot does not go into operating revenues; it goes to the Community Fund). Spending money, not just on the StP, but on concessions (lines were enormous).

There is some added excitement with all of the off-season moves, with the Votto extension and probably with a Phillips extension. And I don't have a sense we're looking at a Marlins model. I'm thinking Castellini and company have plugged in the numbers and have a good sense of how to make this all work. We'll see.

Not having been to GABP...what's "Split the Pot"?

REDREAD
04-06-2012, 09:26 AM
I go back to the models we have seen from other teams. The Marlins spent big and won it all in 1997, then had to dismantle the team in 1998 because their WS victory didn't bring in fans. .

Actually, I don't agree with this.
After the Marlins won their first WS, they were selling lots of season tickets.
One writer even projected a 3 million attendence year for them .. whether that prediction was reasonable, I don't know.. but the point is they were selling lots of tickets. Ownership had a firesale, and people demanded refunds on season tickets.. The Marlins pretty much alienated a huge chunk of their fanbase.
If they continued to try to win, they may have been transformed like the Cardinals were... It may have been the one of the biggest mistakes a franchise ever made.

buckeyenut
04-06-2012, 09:38 AM
Thing is, the Reds didn't spend big this offseason, payroll was more or less in line w/ expectations. Sure they locked themselves into some big financial payouts 4 years from now w/ Votto, but for the immediate future (the next 4 seasons) they're well positioned w/ players like Votto, Bruce, Cueto, Latos, Meseraco, Stubbs, Cozart, Marshall, etc... all locked into reasonable contract, league minimum contracts or early arbitration numbers. The way they structured the Votto deal gives them 4 years to establish a winning identity which should lead to more fans in the stands, and larger revenue streams from merchandising, TV & radio rights, advertising dollars, etc... Everything's risky by nature of injury, but how many better bets are there in baseball than Votto to build around? How many of those "other" bets would have been available to the Reds the way Votto has been for negotiations. I know there is a lot of your typical player's talk, but it feels like both Bruce & Votto are interested in being the cornerstone's for this franchise.

Aside from all that, how much money is each team expecting from the increased playoffs? How long will it take for them to move from a 1 game format to a 3 game format, increasing those revenue's even more? How much money will the Reds net by hosting the All Star game? How much money was Carl Linder and the rest of the previous ownership group pulling out of the Reds each season, vs how much the current ownership group want are pulling out? Was Linder looking to make significan coin, while perhaps Bob just wants to break even?

Bob didn't get rich by being stupid, he's had several years to get a handle on the team's revenue and an insight into future projections. Its not just the Reds, but it seems like all over the landscape baseball is doing well, huge contracts are being dished out. What makes St Louis and Milawaukee all that much different than Cincy? Why do we accept that St Louis and the Brewers can handle a $100 mil payroll and not question it, but Cincy is forever stuck in the small market mentality. Bob is betting that Cincy can become a strong baseball town again. We may never be the Yankees or Boston, but if they're smart, extend the right guys, build up the system, use prospects for proven talent and turn some of the prospects into solid regulars for the Reds they can certainly position themselves into regular contention.

I think this really hits on it. I think all this is a collection of a bunch of things.
1. Castellini has been in this position now long enough to really understand what he has and what the opportunities are, particularly when it comes to things like internet revenue
2. The last several years has not seen significant payroll growth. I think the moves that have been made have been shrewd, spending very wisely.
3. He has a TV contract come due in a couple of years that he knows he will get a much higher return on
4. He has had some time to understand the new labor agreement and the likely financial impact of that.
5. Specifically, revenue sharing across the board has gotten much more stringent and the Reds, as the team with the lowest TV market in baseball, should expect to get a higher share of that.
6. He knows he has a good young team with a very high likelihood of playoff competition over the next five years as constructed. His two biggest competitors in the division just took big hits this offseason. And there is now an extra playoff spot. It is now a fairly safe bet we will see playoff revenue at least 2 out of the next 5 years.
7. He has been promised an allstar game and the associated revenue from that.
8. The banks project is finally beyond critical mass. There was a definite vibe outside the ballpark which can only have a very positive effect on ticket sales.
9. By structuring this deals right and doing them now, he can have some level of cost control while at the same time deferring some of the spend until after some of the items above come into play.

All in all, I don't think what they have done is a huge stretch. In fact, I believe they still might have breathing room to get something done down the stretch if we are in it and need some help. But regardless, I am very appreciative of the investment and am excited by this team.

757690
04-06-2012, 09:58 AM
I go back to the models we have seen from other teams. The Marlins spent big and won it all in 1997, then had to dismantle the team in 1998 because their WS victory didn't bring in fans. The Arizona Diamondbacks spent big and won it all in 2001, and LOST money to the point that they had to sell off players and the roster was unrecognizable by 2003. The Marlins came back in 2003 and won again. And sank back into oblivion in 2004. The Marlins spent a boatload of money this off-season, but I have a feeling it won't draw enough fans and by July, we could see a fire sale in Miami.

I do not want to see this team win the 2012 World Series then have to unload because the money is not there to keep these players who won. I know what it is like to have the home team in the World Series four times in seven seasons with the BRM, and I want to see that again. But the realities of baseball economics are always going to favor the bigger market teams.

Both those teams were brand new expansion teams that went out and starting spending money they didn't have from the beginning of their existence. That created a debt that no amount of winning could overcome. Very different financial situation than what the Reds have now.

Caveat Emperor
04-06-2012, 10:36 AM
I don't really care if they run the team in the red so long as the team is good and fans are responding. Ownership has plenty of dough and they'll make a profit when they sell anyway (though I would like to see this ownership group --Castellini/Williams -- control the team for a long time). What would bother me is if fans do not respond. This is the ownership group and the team Cincinnati has been waiting for. Now, it's up to the fans to show that Cincinnati remains the baseball town history says it is.

I'm always mildly entertained by the excuses that come pouring out from Reds fans about why the turnstiles are silent through the majority April / May.

"School is still in session!" - My bedtime in grade school was 9:00. We went to games all the time, and being up until 10:00 once every other week or so didn't kill me.

"The weather is cold!" - Paul Brown Stadium draws 45,000 in sub-zero temperatures. Nippert Stadium draws 25,000 under the same conditions. Wear a coat.

"It's too expensive" - Tickets to a Reds game (if you don't care where you sit) can be had for $7-$10 apiece. You are allowed to bring food into the stadium. Bring $5 footlong subs into the game and you can have a family four out for a night game for under $50 with dinner included. Heck, you can even pack dinner at home to save even more money.

Cincinnati Reds fans: making lame excuses since 1882.

MikeS21
04-06-2012, 10:44 AM
If the Reds win the 2012 WS I don't really care what they do for an encore. But I do think that there are various revenue streams that are available to current baseball teams that weren't even thought of years ago. There is the MLB network, MLB TV deals that have skyrocketed, satellite Radio, streaming aps, etc. Further technological advances will only line the owners pockets even more.
And that is where we differ. Having experienced the BRM dynasty and the multiple WS appearances in a seven or eight year stretch, a WS victory is 1000% sweeter when you know you have a chance to be back "next" year and the year after (an the year after). You really can't enjoy winning, when you know by the next Opening Day, your team will look different.

Honestly, I think that is what made the 1978-1988 Reds teams so disappointing. It wasn't that they were bad players. They just weren't up to the caliber players that we got used to during the 70's. Dan Dreissan was no Tony Perez. Ron Oester was no Joe Morgan. Ray Knight was no Pete Rose. (Ironically, the Reds brought in Tom Seaver in 1977 AFTER things started going to the pot).

I truly feel sorry for the younger folks on this board who did not experience what a true dynasty feels like. Once you experience it, you will NEVER be satisfied with a once-every-twenty-years championship.

Homer Bailey
04-06-2012, 11:49 AM
The way I see, it: The Reds are not going to be big players in the free agent market. Never really have been, and I don't see that changing. I'm not sure this is a bad thing. The free agent market rarely rewards teams with surplus value obtained. The only thing the Reds really have to worry about it is maintaining their own players once they get expensive. If they're able to do that, I don't have any issues with what they spend.

Reds/Flyers Fan
04-06-2012, 11:57 AM
Yesterday's game was the highest attendance for a regular season game. I'm not sure that will be sustained, but it was heartening to see.

I don't know if this means anything, but I was surprised on Tuesday when the split the pot amount was nearly $1500 with a crowd just under 13,000. Yesterday's Split the Pot was around five grand, a number I've never seen at a Reds game. There were alot of people there yesterday and they were spending money (caveat - yes, I know the other half of the pot does not go into operating revenues; it goes to the Community Fund). Spending money, not just on the StP, but on concessions (lines were enormous).

There is some added excitement with all of the off-season moves, with the Votto extension and probably with a Phillips extension. And I don't have a sense we're looking at a Marlins model. I'm thinking Castellini and company have plugged in the numbers and have a good sense of how to make this all work. We'll see.

At the game yesterday, around about the 6th inning, I bought tickets for Saturday's opening night game. There were no tickets available anywhere in the lower stadium, nothing in the moon deck, nothing in the left field bleachers. I had to settle for sec. 534. And with tomorrow looking like a nice day with no threat of rain and a high in the upper 60s, I would imagine the walkup will be quite strong.

The Reds really got burned by the weather last year. It certainly limited walkup crowds and thousands of unsold day-of-game tickets. Hopefully it's just the opposite this year.

And people were spending money all over downtown yesterday. Lines were enormous everywhere. I went to Arnold's, Cincy's on Sixth, Walnut Street Grill, Head First and Moerlein, and everywhere - EVERYWHERE - was slammed. Dollars were flying like New Year's Eve in Las Vegas.

corkedbat
04-06-2012, 12:08 PM
Buddy of mine who has season tickets was complaining because beers were up to $8 apiece. That could have something to do with the new-found prosperity too. :D

AmarilloRed
04-06-2012, 12:22 PM
The Reds look like they're going for a 5-6 year window at minimum. Cueto, Bruce, Votto all will now be under contract through 2015-2016. My question is what will the arbitration raises look like at that time. Even if you raise the budget to 100 million, the arb raises may well cause us to go over budget.

MikeThierry
04-06-2012, 12:37 PM
Among all of the things discussed, like a new TV contract, the Reds have a huge amount of room to increase their prices at the stadium. The Reds are one of the best values for a family in baseball. If the prices were the same with the Cards as they were with the Reds, I would probably buy season tickets to the Cardinals. Reds fans a practically spending half of what most people pay in other ballparks league wide. If the Reds remain competitive, increase their attendence, while increasing ticket prices; obviously that is going to pay huge dividends towards payroll down the road.

cincrazy
04-06-2012, 01:34 PM
And that is where we differ. Having experienced the BRM dynasty and the multiple WS appearances in a seven or eight year stretch, a WS victory is 1000% sweeter when you know you have a chance to be back "next" year and the year after (an the year after). You really can't enjoy winning, when you know by the next Opening Day, your team will look different.

Honestly, I think that is what made the 1978-1988 Reds teams so disappointing. It wasn't that they were bad players. They just weren't up to the caliber players that we got used to during the 70's. Dan Dreissan was no Tony Perez. Ron Oester was no Joe Morgan. Ray Knight was no Pete Rose. (Ironically, the Reds brought in Tom Seaver in 1977 AFTER things started going to the pot).

I truly feel sorry for the younger folks on this board who did not experience what a true dynasty feels like. Once you experience it, you will NEVER be satisfied with a once-every-twenty-years championship.

I understand how you long for the BRM era again. But you have to understand, this franchise will NEVER repeat that. It was literally a once-in-a-lifetime thing. To be cherished, and remembered, but it will not be duplicated. That isn't to say this team can't contend year in and year out. It can. And I believe that it will. But I'm not going to get upset if we only win "one" World Series. To me, one World Series is the world :)

MikeS21
04-06-2012, 02:51 PM
Actually, I don't agree with this.
After the Marlins won their first WS, they were selling lots of season tickets.
One writer even projected a 3 million attendence year for them .. whether that prediction was reasonable, I don't know.. but the point is they were selling lots of tickets. Ownership had a firesale, and people demanded refunds on season tickets.. The Marlins pretty much alienated a huge chunk of their fanbase.
If they continued to try to win, they may have been transformed like the Cardinals were... It may have been the one of the biggest mistakes a franchise ever made.
No, you are right. The ticket sales did go up. My point is that even with the additional ticket sales, the owners realized it still wouldn't be enough to sustain their payroll.

Here's the thing to think about. If the Reds sold out EVERY home game - all 81 of them in 2012, attendance would be just over 3.4 million (assuming a sell out at GABP is 42K attendance).

Now, assume that all 3.4 million fans spend an AVERAGE of $35 per person on parking, tickets, concessions, and souvenirs (that means a family of four will spend an average of $140). That leads to stadium income from attendance to be $119 million for the entire season. I think it safe to skim 15% off the top to pay all the overhead (stadium workers, security, concession vendors, FO employee and expenses, transportation and housing expenses for the team, etc.). That leaves about $101 million for player salaries.

What that tells me is that at maximum capacity, GABP will only add $100 million to the payroll. Any additional payroll over $100 million will need to be off set from elsewhere.

In 2011, the Reds drew 2.2 million at home (average per game of 27,327), good enough for 16th best in all of baseball. (If you really want an eye-opener, on the road in 2011, the Reds drew an average of 33,120, second best only to the Yankees, who drew an average of 33,228.) Here's sticking point: in order for the Reds to hit 3 million, they need to increase average per game attendance by 10K per game. That means instead of 27K per game, they need to average 37K per game. Tall order for one season. However, if they can raise the average about 2500 per games for each of the next four years, that may be much more doable.

redsmetz
04-06-2012, 03:04 PM
Not having been to GABP...what's "Split the Pot"?

LOL, you're clearly not Catholic either. You buy a chance and however much they sell (let's say $4000), they "split the pot" & the prize is $2000 for the winning number.

klw
04-06-2012, 03:27 PM
Well the potential next step after Brandon could be to wrap up Mez through his arbitration years akin to how the Rays do things. I don't know that Cozart would get the same treatment as there is a greater number of potential replacements at SS coming down the pike in the system.

corkedbat
04-06-2012, 03:33 PM
Well the potential next step after Brandon could be to wrap up Mez through his arbitration years akin to how the Rays do things. I don't know that Cozart would get the same treatment as there is a greater number of potential replacements at SS coming down the pike in the system.

I want to see at least two years performance from Mes before I start talking about buying years (unless he comes up with a Mega-Monster year this year). I'd say Latos would be in line before Mes and I'd wait another year there too.

mth123
04-06-2012, 10:21 PM
Well the potential next step after Brandon could be to wrap up Mez through his arbitration years akin to how the Rays do things. I don't know that Cozart would get the same treatment as there is a greater number of potential replacements at SS coming down the pike in the system.

Latos.

Ghosts of 1990
04-06-2012, 10:34 PM
They're spending more, but if they're successful they're going to draw a lot more. Spend money, make $. I love it.

WVRedsFan
04-07-2012, 01:24 AM
My philosophy has always been to let management make these decisions based on what they know. I know nothing except what I've read--that we are a small market team that doesn't make much money and we can't afford to do certain things. maybe that's not true. I don't know. I'll let them make the decisions and hope for the best. If they screw up, I'll howl like the junkyard dog. Nothing new here.

Matt700wlw
04-07-2012, 01:47 AM
Buddy of mine who has season tickets was complaining because beers were up to $8 apiece. That could have something to do with the new-found prosperity too. :D

You can get a 24oz draft for $9.


The 16oz plastic bottles are $8

Matt700wlw
04-07-2012, 01:51 AM
The Castellini's are invested in the Banks project, which FINALLY is up and running, and seems to be doing very well.

It's still not finished....as it continues to grow, the revenues will continue to grow, and will be profitable all year long.

GAC
04-07-2012, 05:49 AM
Buddy of mine who has season tickets was complaining because beers were up to $8 apiece.

Isn't that like owning a Lexus and complaining about the price of gas? :laugh:

GAC
04-07-2012, 05:51 AM
You can get a 24oz draft for $9.


The 16oz plastic bottles are $8

What's the price of Christian Moerlein? :D

BCubb2003
04-07-2012, 08:05 AM
The crazy thing is, the Reds paid an uncharacteristically large amount of money for Chapman, and although it's definitely not a failure, they haven't received full value, and they spent big on Madson, with absolutely nothing to show for it, and they haven't been scared off. It's full speed ahead. It's refreshing.

paulrichjr
04-07-2012, 09:02 AM
I think I know how. If you build it they will come. Because both of my boys are off this weekend for the first and only time for a long time from baseball I decided to go to the 2nd game of the season...seeing Latos was my "excuse". (I live 6 hours away) Anyway, I assumed "second game of season not many there", wrong it appears. I ended up buying tickets close to each other but not beside each other. I noticed on Stub Hub that all tickets were almost gone also with SRO tickets being sold. Maybe fielding an exciting team gets people excited about baseball....I don't know.

HokieRed
04-07-2012, 09:20 AM
Inflation, pure and simple. BC understands time value of money. He's locking in a 2020 Votto at 2012 prices.

BCubb2003
04-07-2012, 10:23 AM
Inflation, pure and simple. BC understands time value of money. He's locking in a 2020 Votto at 2012 prices.

Yes, let's hope the rest of us are making 2020 money in 2020.

RedEye
04-07-2012, 10:49 AM
My philosophy has always been to let management make these decisions based on what they know. I know nothing except what I've read--that we are a small market team that doesn't make much money and we can't afford to do certain things. maybe that's not true. I don't know. I'll let them make the decisions and hope for the best. If they screw up, I'll howl like the junkyard dog. Nothing new here.

I suppose according to the current plan we won't really know if they've "screwed up" for another four or five years. That's when we'll see whether players like Bruce and Cueto (or the like) can be kept around to supplement Votto. Until then, though, pending performance of course, it looks like the team is set up to be pretty successful.

RedEye
04-07-2012, 10:54 AM
This from the other thread about the Padres TV deal. Looks like Bob might know what he's doing -- at least if the Reds can get something resembling what San Diego is about to:

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/apr/06/mlb-close-approving-padres-tv-deal/


Major League Baseball has signed off on the structure of the Padres' 20-year television deal with Fox Sports, two sources familiar with the situation said, and there are believed to be no remaining obstacles for formal approval.

An official announcement could be forthcoming as soon as next week.

The deal could be worth up to $1.2 billion to the Padres -- an average of $50 million a year in rights fees plus a signing bonus estimated as high as $200 million.

The Padres also received a 20 percent equity stake in Fox Sports San Diego, the new TV home of the club.

FSSD is available on Cox Cable (channels 56/1056) and DirecTV (694). Fox Sports does not have agreements with Time Warner Cable, AT&T U-Verse or Dish Network.

Roy Tucker
04-07-2012, 10:58 AM
LOL, you're clearly not Catholic either. You buy a chance and however much they sell (let's say $4000), they "split the pot" & the prize is $2000 for the winning number.

:laugh: I thought the same thing.

A very common thing here in the Cinci area. Church festivals and high school sporting events are the most common. You buy one (or a strip) of tickets for some reasonable fee like $1 for a ticket or $5 for a strip. Each has a serial number on it. At the end of the event, they draw a ticket. The winner gets to split the pot 50-50 with the house.

I've bought tickets for these things probably 100's of times and won just once. It was at a girls HS basketball game and I won $37. Bought pizza for the family that night. I'm the eternal optimist and continue to buy them.

George Anderson
04-07-2012, 11:47 AM
I understand the comments of the people that like the contract but it still doesn't sit well with me. I can't give any real intelligent reason other than I have slept on it and my "spidey senses" tell me it won't end up good. I hope to hell I am wrong.

HokieRed
04-07-2012, 01:58 PM
Yes, let's hope the rest of us are making 2020 money in 2020.

We won't be, but there will be enough people who are to put the fannies in the seats and the TV package will be affordable for the rest of us.

Chip R
04-07-2012, 02:00 PM
What's the price of Christian Moerlein? :D

$9

757690
04-07-2012, 02:22 PM
$9

Visiting a friend in LA and he invited me to Dodger game. He told me to pay him back for the ticket by buying him a beer at the game. I though he was being nice, until I went to the concession stand. Domestic beer - $12. The ticket cost $9. lol

paulrichjr
04-07-2012, 03:41 PM
Well Latos paid for himself tonight in extra tix sold. Game is sold out. Please tell me the last time the Reds had two sell outs to start the season.

paulrichjr
04-07-2012, 03:45 PM
Well the Reds just posted that this is the first time since at least 1969 the first 2 games were sold out. Wow that is a little history during that span.

redsmetz
04-20-2012, 07:57 AM
Today's edition of the Cincinnati Business Courier features an article exploring whether the Reds may find themselves getting more money from their cable deal. It notes that it's not uncommon for such contracts to have renegotiating clauses, although the writer writes that it's not known whether they in fact do have such a clause. He notes that the Reds viewership on cable is good and would put them on par with what the San Diego market has for number of actual viewers. And he notes that these high priced deals are being driver by the fact that watching live sports is something folks want and the added ad revenue is driven by the fact that since many more people watch them live, the ads are actually watched, obviously making that more valuable for advertisers.

The article finishes with this:

The Reds’ signings of Votto and Phillips could serve as a chip in the Reds’ negotiations with TV partners – in fact, some say the players were signed because the team knew it’s TV deal would improve.

“That strengthens their image for TV viewers, some of whom are casual fans,” Cobbs said. “The Reds can expect to get better ratings because the fans know who they’re tuning in to watch.

“It’s almost a pre-emptive strike the Reds are making in the negotiations.”

When the Reds do negotiate a new TV pact, it’ll help to have competition among bidders. The Padres signed with a newly formed Fox Sports San Diego, replacing its previous pact with cable TV operator Cox Communications.

While Fox Sports Ohio is the only clear local choice now for a regional TV contract, that doesn’t mean the Reds don’t have options.

I would suggest it may behoove FSO to renegotiate while they're the only player in the field and look to extend the contract beyond 2016. Four years out gives the Reds the opportunity to explore other options or for other content providers to explore adding the Reds regional areas to their repertoire.

Chip R
04-20-2012, 08:58 AM
Visiting a friend in LA and he invited me to Dodger game. He told me to pay him back for the ticket by buying him a beer at the game. I though he was being nice, until I went to the concession stand. Domestic beer - $12. The ticket cost $9. lol

That's what I do a lot of the time.