Reds should spend money and try to win, not increase short-term profits

[backbencher]

The Reds do probably spend a higher percentage of intake coming in than most. They just don't spend it wisely. The way things are currently setup, they simply can't spend like the Dodgers. I know it's fun to spend others money, but no business is going to operate at a loss year in and year out.

As far as signing big name free agents that rarely works out, especially in the post juice era. I'm all for extending arbitration eligible players, but a big name free agent would have to be the final piece for a contender.

Good comment.

The Reds are objectively (source: MLB's collective bargaining agreement) the smallest market in MLB. All else equal, every other team in MLB can outbid the Reds for free agents, ever time. The Reds can win only by making "all else" not equal - being smarter, being lucky, finding inefficiencies, finding new sources of talent, etc. Not a novel proposition - it was a whole Michael Lewis book and Brad Pitt movie, and all - but that does not make it any less true.

- - - Updated - - -

The majority are real estate developers too, bet they all had a spoon in the Banks project and any other GAB area related property. It's all integrated and has more to do with their portfolios than their love of a local institution

Makes sense.

Also makes sense that the consortium has been extra-cautious financially while recouping from pandemic era losses.

[InsaneinthBrame]

Good comment.

The Reds are objectively (source: MLB's collective bargaining agreement) the smallest market in MLB.

Where are you seeing that in the collective bargaining agreement? Because in reality it is not true as of now, but with the continued mismanagement of this year that may become true

[Redsfan6272]

They need a billionaire that hates losing and will make the Reds a winner aka Cohen.. or we hear the small market excuse. Funny tge Bengals are not called small market and they just sold out thier season tickets and they are now committed to winning!

[backbencher]

Where are you seeing that in the collective bargaining agreement? Because in reality it is not true as of now, but with the continued mismanagement of this year that may become true

I've posted this several times before.

The agreement is on the MLBPA website.

The market scores, which are based on the generally non-public but audited financials of each club, are listed in Attachment 26.

Cincinnati not only is the smallest market currently but based on demographic trends and local cost of living (i.e., ticket prices and therefore ticket revenue) is likely to remain the smallest for the foreseeable future.

- - - Updated - - -

They need a billionaire that hates losing and will make the Reds a winner aka Cohen.. or we hear the small market excuse. Funny tge Bengals are not called small market and they just sold out thier season tickets and they are now committed to winning!

The NFL has a different revenue sharing model than baseball.

And if you follow the news, the Bengals have their own potential financial limitations related to the escrow of signing bonuses. That is (presumably) part of the impetus to rename the stadium.

[RedsBaron]

She was largely a terrible person, and when it came to baseball dumber than a box of rocks, but it says something about Reds ownership to realize that arguably their best, or at least most successful, owner in the last 40 years was Marge Schott.

[seligstinks]

That claimed smallest market size doesn't seem to take into account the number of people living closer to the Reds than any other team, 1.e. what the TV market ought to be. If you go by that, the Reds are one of the top ten biggest markets, but ownership won't try to capitalize on that. I think ownership just wants an excuse not to spend money.

As for ticket revenue, the Reds probably could get quite a bit revenue if they raised ticket prices- but they would have to start winning first. According to one web site, in 2006 (?) the Yankees average ticket was 50 more than the Reds, but more recently (2019?) the same web site shows Yankees ticket prices that are 125 percent (!) more than the Reds- the Reds ticket prices don't seem to have kept pace with other teams. Instead of making the fans mad by getting rid of most of their good players, i'd rather they make the fans mad by raising ticket prices 50 percent to get back to two-thirds of the Yankee price.

[RedsFanInMS]

Start by not doing any nonsense that was talked about last night in the Game Thread about picking up Votto option. No point in dwelling in the past. Move on to this rebuild phase and hopefully they use that money to bring in a better bullpen.

I love Votto, but there is no way in hell they need to pick up his option. No reason at all.

[InsaneinthBrame]

Just because the Reds are incompetent at generating revenue from the market ie ticket and foid prices ect. Does not mean they have the smallest market it means they are not good enough to capitalize on the market. Like I have posted on graphs they have a top ten market of population that gabp is the closest mlb ball park and of tv markets which are regional not cincinnati only they have greater populations and viewership that a majority of mlb teams

[backbencher]

Look, we all love Cincinnati, but this statement (the one I italicized):

That claimed smallest market size doesn't seem to take into account the number of people living closer to the Reds than any other team, 1.e. what the TV market ought to be. If you go by that, the Reds are one of the top ten biggest markets, but ownership won't try to capitalize on that. I think ownership just wants an excuse not to spend money.

is abject nonsense. If that is your frame of reference, you never will understand baseball economics. Los Angeles County is almost 90% of the population of the entire state of Ohio. And Cincinnati is not the largest city in the state, or even the second.

Yes, there are suburbs and exurbs in Kentucky and Indiana, or otherwise outside of Hamilton County. Yes, people can come from Dayton or Columbus or Lexington. Do you know how many cities in California also have suburbs and exurbs, and are larger than Cincinnati? Thirteen.

[RedsManRick]

The majority are real estate developers too, bet they all had a spoon in the Banks project and any other GAB area related property. It's all integrated and has more to do with their portfolios than their love of a local institution

Right. But being part of the portfolio means it's about appreciation of the asset over the long term, not short-term "profits". Don't lose any money operationally and make 10% annually net of inflation in appreciation. No need to risk that by aggressively spending to try to reach a higher payroll/winning equilibrium that won't meaningfully alter the long term arc of the value of the franchise.

[RedsManRick]

The agreement is on the MLBPA website.

The market scores, which are based on the generally non-public but audited financials of each club, are listed in Attachment 26.

Cincinnati not only is the smallest market currently but based on demographic trends and local cost of living (i.e., ticket prices and therefore ticket revenue) is likely to remain the smallest for the foreseeable future.

Huh. Never seen this before.

REVENUE SHARING MARKET SCORE
* Phased in over four years (2017–2020) at 25% per year, per Article
XXIV(A)(12).
RANK   CLUB   SCORE DQ%
1	 NYY	235 100%
1	 NYM 	235 100%
3	 LAD 	178 100%
3 	 LAA 	178 100%
5 	 CHI 	124 100%
5 	 CWS 	124 100%
7 	 TOR 	119 100%
8 	 WSH 	113 100%
9 	 PHI 	111 100%
10 	 OAK 	108 100%*
10 	 SF 	108 100%
12 	 BOS 	101 100%
12 	 TEX 	101 100%
14 	 ATL 	 96   0%
15 	 HOU 	 93   0%
16 	 SEA 	 81   0%
17 	 MIN 	 76   0%
18 	 DET 	 74   0%
19 	 ARI 	 72   0%
19       TB 	 72   0%
21 	 BAL 	 70   0%
21 	 COL 	 70   0%
23 	 MIA 	 69   0%
24 	 CLE 	 64   0%
25 	 SD  	 60   0%
26 	 STL 	 57   0%
27 	 PIT 	 56   0%
28 	 KC  	 53   0%
29 	 MIL 	 52   0%
30 	 CIN 	 51   0%

[KeefeCato]

Start by not doing any nonsense that was talked about last night in the Game Thread about picking up Votto option. No point in dwelling in the past. Move on to this rebuild phase and hopefully they use that money to bring in a better bullpen.

Uhhhhhhh Yes they should pick up Votos option in 2024 If he wants to continue playing. It's not like he would break the bank. And each team has 13 position players. Do you really think they are going to field a team with 13 better position players than Votto?
I'll answer. It's no and no. Only nonsense would be him in another uniform.

[westofyou]

Look, we all love Cincinnati, but this statement (the one I italicized):



is abject nonsense. If that is your frame of reference, you never will understand baseball economics. Los Angeles County is almost 90% of the population of the entire state of Ohio. And Cincinnati is not the largest city in the state, or even the second.

Yes, there are suburbs and exurbs in Kentucky and Indiana, or otherwise outside of Hamilton County. Yes, people can come from Dayton or Columbus or Lexington. Do you know how many cities in California also have suburbs and exurbs, and are larger than Cincinnati? Thirteen.

Portland is a bigger market than Cincinnati and they have one team in the big four sports. If leagues were starting today the chance of Cincinnati having a MLB would be pretty thin

[Tony Cloninger]

Uhhhhhhh Yes they should pick up Votos option in 2024 If he wants to continue playing. It's not like he would break the bank. And each team has 13 position players. Do you really think they are going to field a team with 13 better position players than Votto?
I'll answer. It's no and no. Only nonsense would be him in another uniform.

If he wants to be a PT player and you think they can afford that ok. By 2024 there could be enough players coming from the minors along with Stephenson playing more 1B that he will just be a FT DH. I prefer they spend it on more pitching help.

[Big Klu]

If he wants to be a PT player and you think they can afford that ok. By 2024 there could be enough players coming from the minors along with Stephenson playing more 1B that he will just be a FT DH. I prefer they spend it on more pitching help.

If they don't pick up Votto's option (and they might not), then they are just going to put that money in their pockets.

They aren't spending it on someone else.