reds ownership “poorest of the rich”

[Red Raindog]

MLB Owners’ Net Worth https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2021/...net-worth.html

Says Castellini at $400 million is the poorest owner in MLB


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[757690]

I wonder if that includes his ownership of the Reds or is his is worth outside of it. My guess is it is outside of it.

[westofyou]

That's rough.... said nobody ever

[Red Raindog]

I wonder if that includes his ownership of the Reds or is his is worth outside of it. My guess is it is outside of it.

Makes sense since the team is surely worth more than that number


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Boston Red]

That's rough.... said nobody ever

Obviously it's not rough, but given baseball's system it clearly puts us at a competitive disadvantage. Are there any billionaires in the area that might want a prestige asset?

[westofyou]

Obviously it's not rough, but given baseball's system it clearly puts us at a competitive disadvantage. Are there any billionaires in the area that might want a prestige asset?

I'm pretty sure most of these rich guys don't dip into non baseball funds to enrich their franchise, those days are over. What these guys do instead is except what sort of profit/loss they are comfy within their portfolio and use the funds they get from media, partnerships in the league and their brand/attendance

Problem is the Reds have a smaller piece of the pie when it comes to former and later and the brass is not going to adjust what they want their investment to make, because it's a gamble, they are conservative and they love profit over becoming legendary

[RedsManRick]

I'm pretty sure most of these rich guys don't dip into non baseball funds to enrich their franchise, those days are over. What these guys do instead is except what sort of profit/loss they are comfy within their portfolio and use the funds they get from media, partnerships in the league and their brand/attendance

Problem is the Reds have a smaller piece of the pie when it comes to former and later and the brass is not going to adjust what they want their investment to make, because it's a gamble, they are conservative and they love profit over becoming legendary

You get rich by using other people's money buy assets that mature and/or pay dividends. Rich people tend to be conservative in the sense that they constantly hedge against their downside risk. Near guarantees of operational losses from your own income stream only makes sense if there is a nearly-guaranteed long term payoff in terms of asset appreciation. In baseball, it's not clear that a) Long-term appreciation is primarily a function of winning and b) Winning is primarily a function payroll.

From the stand point of making the most possible money in the long run, the annual break-even strategy is pretty reasonable.

As for becoming legendary, money is a force multiplier. If your management is mediocre, spending a ton of money just makes you the Mets or the Angels.

[westofyou]

You get rich by using other people's money buy assets that mature and/or pay dividends. Rich people tend to be conservative in the sense that they constantly hedge against their downside risk. Near guarantees of operational losses from your own income stream only makes sense if there is a nearly-guaranteed long term payoff in terms of asset appreciation. In baseball, it's not clear that a) Long-term appreciation is primarily a function of winning and b) Winning is primarily a function payroll.

From the stand point of making the most possible money in the long run, the annual break-even strategy is pretty reasonable.

As for becoming legendary, money is a force multiplier. If your management is mediocre, spending a ton of money just makes you the Mets or the Angels.

Exactly, plus the ownership group is pretty large and that means the principal makes/loses less than an ownership group that is smaller or singular. That makes it more of a portfolio item than a side item/ toy in the tradition of a Crosley or a Yawkey.

[corkedbat]

You'd think with the rising price for produce he'd be better off.

[scotly50]

Bob is a minority owner, albeit controlling partner. They should have included all ownership assets to compare equally with other owners.

[JustaFan]

jerry jones, cowboys owner propertedly has a boat worth $500 million perhaps a trade

[NeilHamburger]

Why the f am I paying 7 dollars for strawberries if he's only worth that?

[foster15]

Bob is a minority owner, albeit controlling partner. They should have included all ownership assets to compare equally with other owners.

This is true. But for the point of tying owner assets with paying players, it still is relevant. An owner with a larger majority and with that usually comes a lot more resources(billions vs millions) probably has an easier time tossing a lot more money at the players than an owner with a smaller majority and a lot less resources(millions vs billions). Trying to get other investors with even less money than Bob to agree to up payroll to be more competitive is probably pulling teeth.

All we can hope is that some day we get a billionaire large majority owner who is here for the trophies and stature that comes with it. In the past, when we had that like with Carl, they came with their stated goal as keeping the Reds in Cincinnati which allowed them to slide by not spending money. He was there to make easy money and come off as some local hero that saved the Reds from moving. He didn't need nor care to have the trophies, just the goodwill of "looking out for his city".

[MikeS21]

As of October 2020, there were 614 billionaires in the U.S. Of that number, probably 90% have absolutely no interest in owning a professional sports franchise. That leaves around 60 billionaires who might be interested. Perhaps two-thirds of those 60 already own a franchise, leaving about 20 who might be in the market. Of those 20, only perhaps 2 are the flamboyant, devil-may-care personalities who are the type to throw caution to the wind and be willing to throw money around and get into bidding wars with all the big guys. But those flamboyant billionaire playboys aren’t going to be in Cincinnati. They are going to be in New York or Los Angeles.

It’s as someone stated, the only billionaires that are drawn to the Midwest, are the Carl Lindner types. So, we are going to end up with ownership groups of millionaires, who are trying to become billionaires. They aren’t going to get into bidding wars with billionaires.

[CySeymour]

I'm not overly interested in the Reds getting into bidding wars for free agents. Yes it's fun and adds excitement to the offseason. But that seems like a recipe for locking yourself into too many long term deals that go south. What I do want is an ownership group that doesn't mandate selling off players for pennies on the dollar just to reduce payroll. Moving veterans before they become too expensive isn't a bad strategy. The key is to make sure you get good value in return.