Stanton a Ratbird?

[Kinsm]

The team may be, and likely, is worth that. But they can't spend that since they haven't sold the club. I mean, they sold 30% of the club for 65M$ right after buying it. They aren't sitting around with stacked millions around them - thinking about how foolishly they can spend it.

The club is paying down debt.

[WrongVerb]

Castellini & the Williams brothers took out 100M$ in debt when they purchased the club, the Reds are paying that down now. It's not unlike the Marlins & Astros sales, the only difference is when they decided to pay it down - right away or wait.

Reds money from Bamtech was supposedly given to the minority shareholders as they'd never received a dividend from owning shares in the club.

Below is how the team's ownership is split.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This team's primary owner is Bob Castellini. Castellini has one of the smaller ownership positions among MLB teams’ primary owners though.

The shares Castellini and the Williams brothers initially purchased for 270 M$ (or roughly 70% of the franchise) came from Carl Lindner, Louise Nippert, William Reik, George Strike, Great American Insurance Company, and the Gannett Co - who combined owned nearly 100% of the club at that time. The Lindner family - 9%, the Nippert family - 6%, Reik - 6%, and Strike - 9% retained the other outstanding 30% of shares after Castellini's purchase (but the Nippert's eventually sold their share to Frank Cohen and Strike's shares were also sold upon his death).

Big Bob's group (he and the Williams brothers) then immediately turned around and sold a large chunk of their shares to 10 minority owner groups as non-voting shares. Each of them received approximately 3% of the club for a 6.5 M$ investment fee. Leaving Castellini and the Williams' controlling roughly 40% of the team. The sales were part of the original financing plan Castellini laid out to MLB in his bid for the club. It helped him reduce his debt load down to approximately 35 M$, which was initially 100 M$ of the 270 M$ purchase price.

In all there are 19 different shareholders with at least a 3% stake. Big Bob is the majority shareholder at 15% and he is also listed as the primary owner with MLB, the other 18 shareholders have a smaller stake.

Reds Ownership Shares as of 12/15/16:

Bob Castellini (15%), W. Joseph Williams (12%), Tom Williams (12%), Lindner Reds Baseball LLC (9%), Frank Cohen (6%), William Reik Jr. (6%), Buy Buy Baseball LLC (3%), EMK Investment Company LLC (3%), Larry Sheakley (3%), Jeff Wyler (3%), Harry Fath (3%), Jeff Gendell (3%), AACE LLC (3%), HKR Baseball LLC (3%), Ron Sargent (3%), John Wyant (3%), Queen City Diamond LLC (3%), Heading for Home LLC (3%), and Art Hauser (3%).

LLC's Above Broken Down -->
Lindner Reds Baseball LLC - Carl Lindner III and Craig Lindner.
Buy Buy Baseball LLC - Rick Steiner Trust, Jim Miller, Rocco Landesman, Gary Rabiner and Dale Rabiner.
EMK Investment Company LLC - Steve Cobb and others.
African American Capital Enterprises LLC - Edwin Riguad and others.
HKR Baseball LLC - Joseph Rouse and others.
Queen City Diamond LLC - George Vincent, Tom Neyer Jr., A.G. Lafley, Jim Johnson, Mike Ryan, Dinsmore & Shole, and Frank Woodside.
Heading for Home LLC - David Drees and Ralph Drees.

FYI: Since the initial purchase Castellini has reportedly expressed interest in buying ownership stakes if any investors decided to sell all or part of their interest in the team, but none of the owners of smaller stakes have seemed interested in doing so with the exception of the Nippert Trust in 2014.

You're becoming quite the resource on this board. Much obliged for all the documentation.

[dougdirt]

The team is worth well over 900 million now according to Forbes

The money for BAMTECH to me shows that they rather make money than invest in the Team.

And none of that money is included in my payroll estimate. Baseball is flush with money.

That MLB BAM Tech money is a one time payment. You can invest it now in payroll, but eventually, and quickly, it's gone, and then you've got to trim payroll.

In terms of cash on hand to actually pay the bills, the Reds don't have nearly the kind of money you seem to believe they do. Do I believe team owners should be willing to operate at a loss (and having to reach into personal finances) to increase franchise value for the sale day when they really make their money? Sure. But claiming the franchise value and saying they can afford to do something because of it isn't the same thing as actually having that kind of money on hand to write the checks and have them clear.

[InsaneinthBrame]

The Reds payroll is not in line with what the Reds have increased in revenues. The Reds payroll since 2013 has went from 106 million to 95 last year but their revenue has increased by 65+ million per year.

[InsaneinthBrame]

The team may be, and likely, is worth that. But they can't spend that since they haven't sold the club. I mean, they sold 30% of the club for 65M$ right after buying it. They aren't sitting around with stacked millions around them - thinking about how foolishly they can spend it.

The club is paying down debt.

The debt amount 35 million is insignificant compared to yearly revenues and payroll plus it has been 12 years there should be no debt. The max interest should only be 1.75 million (5%) them paying 4 million a year would have paid this debt off. 4 million is not much when dealing with the Reds payroll.

[Z-Fly]

Reds Opening day payroll (Per Cot's);

2017 - $95 Million
2016 - $90 Million
2015 - $115 Million
2014 - $114 Million
2013 - $106 Million
2012 - $87 Million
2011 - $80 million
2010 - $76 Million
2009 - $73 Million
2008 - $74 Million

The Reds net payroll over the 10 year period went up roughly $26 million. The average MLB payroll went up roughly $55 million. I understand that things aren't exactly linear, but I do believe the Reds could comfortably sustain a payroll of $130 million.

[M2]

Important to remember that capital budgets (e.g. the money spent on acquiring the club) and operating budgets generally are two separate animals. Owners might use operating revenue to pay capital costs, but it rarely works in opposite direction. How do you think they got so rich?

However, the Reds probably could maintain a higher payroll if they had a good team. For a bad team, the ~$100M range seems to be their limit. As such, they probably aren't making major investments until Rocco and Homer are gone. Mind you, I'd be thrilled if they took a more aggressive approach.

[WrongVerb]

I think I'd be more worried about the Cardinals getting Marcel Ozuna. He's a great fit there.

[BCubb2003]

Marlins prefer to trade Stanton to the Cardinals.

http://mlb.nbcsports.com/2017/11/09/...cardinals/amp/

[KronoRed]

Let us hope it happens.

[Falls City Beer]

Let us hope it happens.

I don't remember the last time a Cards' trade blew up on them. The Dmitri Young trade?

[Kinsm]

Let us hope it happens.

Might make it worthwhile to actually go to GABP.

[KronoRed]

Might make it worthwhile to actually go to GABP.

I'm thinking boats in the river catching the bombs.

[M2]

I'm thinking boats in the river catching the bombs.

But think about all the joy we'll get from hating the Cardinals.

[corkedbat]

If you can't fairly comfortably afford to support a $110-120M payroll when you're ready to "compete," you can't afford a major league franchise. You certainly can't afford a nearly Quarter-Billion $$$ first baseman.