Attanasio: Melvin still looking

[1Badgerfan]

LouisEly, the Brewers don't get to keep all ticket revenue in the postseason. If you would like the details the following article does a good job of looking at who gets the playoff revenue: http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/articles/2007/10/04/playoffs_not_ticket_to_riches/ The Tigers and Cards from 2006 got less than $7 million each in revenue for going to the WS.

You have to keep in mind all of the other revenue as well though. Like I said when I posted the same link yesterday, this wouldn't include parking, concessions, merchandise sales etc. Not to mention increased advertising and media revenue in future years. So I am sure that it is still a decent sum of money. We just have to hope the series' all go the distance as the owner's share increases after the first 3 or 4 games.

 

[kramnoj]

I think it's a bunch of bologna that that the Brewers will lose money this year. It's an easy thing for Mark A. to claim when he doesn't have to prove it.

He's just laying down groundwork for ticket/food increases for next year.

 

But he doesn't have to do that. The Brewers have been able to do that this year and past years while making a proft.

 

I don't understand why people are so suspicious of this ownership group. I don't find it at all hard to believe that in 2008 the Brewers will spend more money than they bring in. I don't think it's that big of a deal either, or the team wouldn't have made the move to trade for CC.

 

You have to keep in mind all of the other revenue as well though.

 

Good point. Here is an 2001 article that looked at the books of baseball . Here is the total postseason revenue for teams that made the playoffs:

 

Team Postseason Revenue

 

New York Yankees $16,000,000

Arizona Diamondbacks $13,000,000

Seattle Mariners $7,392,000

Oakland Athletics $2,686,000

Atlanta Braves $2,629,000

Cleveland Indians $2,000,000

St. Louis Cardinals $1,488,000

Houston Astros $519,000

Chicago Cubs ($17,000)

New York Mets ($154,000)

 

from: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1305

 

BTW, if anybody is really interested in looking at baseball finances, that is the best series that I have ever seen.

[brewmann04]

Well the bottom line is would anybody here believe if they were told in 2008 the Brewers Payroll would be @ 90 Million.

Great Job by Mark Attanasio by putting a good product on the field and continue to add to the team even if that means adding

payroll. I am glad we got him as our owner and that he has given Melvin the Green light for more additions.

[Chio151]

Yeah, Mark A gets it. Even if it's just an investment, the best way of improving the value is building excitement and continuing to re-invest in your product. He's done a marvelous job of ramping this up quickly.

[joepepsi]

dumb question: but IF we make the playoffs do Brian and Bill and FSN Wisconsin still cover the games or do we have FOX doing the games

I know they used to do this back in the 80s and prior (before Cable for the most part), but not in today's age.

However, Bob and Jim would still be on the radio, as XM broadcasts the national feed and both the home and road radio feeds during every post-season game.

 

Of course Sunday playoff games will be pre-empted on most radio stations in the state so the Super Important Packer games can be broadcast.

I find it hard to believe any baseball team is truly losing money. As an investment they are always making money. Plus there are so many revenue streams that go unreported or are hidden through related companies, such as team owned cable networks. Even if the books don't show a profit you can bet lots of people are making a fortune in the form of salaries, perks, dividend payouts...

 

[Leinie Lodge]

A short-term "loss" while still knocking away at those nasty debt leftovers from the 90's.

The fact that Mr. Attanasio and DM are willing to pursue premium players NOW shows their level of commitment to us.

It's a truly exciting time to be a Brewer Fan!

 

Great analysis Igor,

I'm certain the Brewers would be absolutely delighted if they COULD run future years' revenue projections at 3 million attendance.

Making the playoffs this year, with our cupboards still well intact, can make 3mil a realistic, sustainable number for years to come.

More resources to pay off the debt quickly, develop and acquire talent, give Jack Z a large raise, etc

[joepepsi]

If they make the playoff this year, season ticket sales for 2009 will skyrocket. Plus, payroll could go down significantly. Any or all of these players may gone next season: Sheets, CC, Gagne, Mota, Torres, Cameron, even Kendall. That's $40-45 million of this year's payroll.

[T B0NE 10]

When the NFL season begins does do the Brewers usually lose some attendance and viewers?

[TauPentaRei]

I think it's a bunch of bologna that that the Brewers will lose money this year. It's an easy thing for Mark A. to claim when he doesn't have to prove it.

I think this thread is a bunch of bologna. Or at least it needs to be re-labeled as a bologna substitute.

 

"Melvin still looking..." at what? The financial implications of CC? Ha! Maybe he's still looking at the concession revenue, the payroll, the broadcasting, the parade route... no way jose.

 

So what was Mark A actually referring to being the recipient of Doug's gaze? Soaria, Fuentes, B Wilson, Grant Balfour...?

[SeriesFinale]

When the NFL season begins does do the Brewers usually lose some attendance and viewers?

I'll never forget going to a Brewers game one September Sunday in 2003 and seeing half the crowd in the concourse during the game itself watching the Packers on TV...I didn't blame them, either!

 

Regardless, I doubt the Packers will have any affect on attendance in a year where the Brewers are making a charge although I imagine they'd get destroyed in the television ratings, which is to be expected when you're looking at 16 games versus 162

 

[TuesdaysWithRillo]

maybe Gabe Gross is available. Seriously LH bat that could help in the OF would be very nice.

Why couldn't that be Branyan? If Hall gets back into a groove and can play 3B every day, then we have our Lefty bat in the OF.

[1992casey]

Of course Sunday playoff games will be pre-empted on most radio stations in the state so the Super Important Packer games can be broadcast.

Last year, the Brewers would have bumped the Packers off of WTMJ had they still been fighting for a playoff spot the season's final day. I have no clue what would have happened outstate, though.

 

During the playoffs themselves, there are a lot of variables that could factor in. While WTMJ, XM, and MLB.com audio would be the only outlets that can carry Bob and Jim--with other Brewers Radio Network affiliates being able to pick up the national feed, you have to figure that ESPN affiliates, in addition to Brewers Radio Network, would also be in the mix to carry games. That adds options.

[rluzinski]

Doesn't Forbes release each team's profitability each year?

 

That's just Forbes' educated guess. MLB teams don't open their books to the public, generally speaking. I think the Bug had to when he had to sell the team, though. My understanding is that it was very unusual to do so.

"No wonder Paul Beeston, a former executive of the Toronto Blue Jays and former president of MLB, once boasted, "I can turn a $4 million profit into a $2 million loss and get every national accounting firm to agree with me."

 

That's our point exactly, and that's why we bothered to gather the data and do our own analysis.

 

http://www.forbes.com/2002/04/01/0401baseball.html

 

And I'm not trying to suggest that Mark A. is some disgraceful lier. There's a certain amount for subjectiveness to whether a team has been profitable or not.

[snyttri]

The-Business-Of-Baseball

 

The Biz of Baseball

 

Attanasio seems like a nice guy and a more straight shooting owner than most. But believing a baseball club owner's representations about profitability makes you about as gullible as if you believe a car salesman's representations about the profit he's making. Owners crying poor as they continue to make more and more money is about as much of a baseball tradition as players bending and breaking the rules to get an edge. If owners admitted how much money they made it would just cost them public sympathy and hurt them in labor negotiations.

[kramnoj]

But believing a baseball club owner's representations about profitability makes you about as gullible as if you believe a car salesman's representations about the profit he's making.

 

This seems needlessly insulting without actually making a point. If you look at your own links, it says that the Brewers operating income was $19.2 million before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization. If you add that to the $71 million the team spent on player payroll last year, we are right around the $90 million rough guess on what this year's payroll is right now. Yes, this team should draw more and make more revenue, but Melvin was making a general statement. Once you add in the interest, taxes, etc, it's still not unreasonable that this team will spend more in 2008 than it brings in.

[snyttri]

I am sorry if you are offended but the comparison to car salesmen and gullibility may get to the heart of the matter in a way that less sincere language couldn't. None of the estimates take into account all the financial benefits the owners receive. The history of baseball suggests that you should not give owners the benefit of the doubt that they are telling the truth about their revenues. They have every incentive not to. In 2001, as stated in the first paragraph of the article rluzinski linked, Bud was claiming that only 2 teams were making money.

 

Until collective bargaining owners were able to rely on gullible players to pay entertainment business stars wages that bore little connection to the revenues they brought in; and now gullible citizens pay for lavish stadiums and sympathize with billionaire owners against millionaire players. Owners preying on the gullible is a part of baseball.

 

EDIT: Mark A. and his partners may be taking a loss according one financial perspective. The Yankees, IIRC, will no longer be paying into revenue sharing soon because, as a result of their new stadium, they will no longer be one of baseball's most profitable teams according to the revenue sharing formula. With everything the Brewers touch making money at record rates and the addition of a star player spiking the records the financial risk of the additional salary can be overestimated. The greater risk may be in failing to add another $10 million in salary that can generate more than that to the value of the Brewers brand.

[kramnoj]

I am sorry if you are offended but the comparison to car salesmen and gullibility may get to the heart of the matter in a way that less sincere language couldn't.

 

If you have to be insulting to prove a point, is it really a point worth making?

 

The history of baseball suggests that you should not give owners the benefit of the doubt that they are telling the truth about their revenues.

 

This is where we differ. I am going to treat Mark like an individual and not be prejudiced against him because of the actions of others.

 

Mark A. and his partners may be taking a loss according one financial perspective

 

That's all he said, yet some here still need to question it. The Yankees have been losing money for years, but the value of the team keeps going up because they are building the brand. Nobody is saying that getting CC is a bad financial move. The only thing that has been said is that this team this year may be in the red.

[igor67]

If I may randomly insert an idea related to the salary coming off the books. Given the number of cheap bats in the system, and the general trend that pitching prospects are much less reliable, why not go aggressive and try to sing both Sheets and Sabathia for in the neighborhood of 20 million/ season? When you realize Gagne and Cameron get you your first 20 million and Sheets plus CC remaining salary is close to another 20 million. Now maybe they are both set on going down the free agency road, but I think it makes way more sense as a strategy to focus on premium pitching talent and cheap developable bats for a real sustained run on a moderate budget.

[hawing]

When the NFL season begins does do the Brewers usually lose some attendance and viewers?

With apologies for chiming in somewhat late, I'd estimate that the Brewers at least lose listeners. Last year we determined that there some overlap between Brewers Radio Network affiliates and Packers Radio Network affiliates. When there's only one station in a market carrying sports, and the Brewers and Packers play at or nearly at the same time, the Packers tend to get picked up. In Milwaukee, WTMJ can broadcast the Packers and move the Brewers to an alternate, lower-power station. Madison can do the same with WIBA and WTSO. In smaller places, there may be no Brewers radio access.

 

If the Brewers are still in the race in September, I'd really like to think attendance would still be healthy, even on dates with a Packers conflict. I would expect the viewing audience to decrease, though; or maybe use of picture-in-picture would spike.

 

 

 

 

 

[jwill535]

Put it this way, there is a reason all of these owners are rich, they don't do things without the chance to make more money(minus Cuban). While the "team" may be operating at a loss, the owners group, Mark included are still making money.

[naivin]

In Milwaukee, WTMJ can broadcast the Packers and move the Brewers to an alternate, lower-power station. Madison can do the same with WIBA and WTSO. In smaller places, there may be no Brewers radio access.

Is this not all determined by the contracts...at least as far as the flagship is concerned, in terms of which must be carried in any given situation?

[joepepsi]

I live in La Crosse. WKTY carries the Brewers on the radio. They are part of a group that owns nearly every station in town. Years ago they'd switch Brewers games to a different station and carry the Packers on WKTY. They didn't do that the last couple years. Even when they did I often had to call the control room of the other station and remind the intern working to switch off the satellite programming and switch on the Brewers. Actually, there have been plenty of Sunday afternoons in the summer when I call WKTY and remind them the Brewers are on, so please switch to the game.

 

You have no idea what it's like to live in a rinky dink media market until you've lived through it. It's especially bad when one media group owns everything, the competition, therefore the incentive to be competent, is eliminated.

[tristarscoop]

We were at Brewers games last season where we had a radio propped on our shoulders and our cell phones getting play by play. We were also at a game where we had the Packers on the radio and my mom at home on the phone giving Cubs updates. Good stuff.

[rluzinski]

My old company had a record breaking year in terms of sales and profits in 2007. My bonus was tied to that profit. For 11 months all we heard about was how great the company was doing. Of course, when it was time to pay the bonuses out, we learn that they weren't anything special. Why? Because our owners had ivested millions (and got a grant from wisconsin) in upgrading their fabrication and machining capabilities. So, they increase the value of their company in terms of capital and production capacity but that doesn't count, apparently. Darn. Profits were flat. Maybe next year.

 

All companies do that stuff. Privately held ones especially. Even Mark A. and the Brewers! They have all those darn loans still, right?

[kramnoj]

All companies do that stuff. Privately held ones especially. Even Mark A. and the Brewers! They have all those darn loans still, right?

 

Nobody is disputing this. The Brewers have made a nice profit in the recent past. They should make a nice profit in the future. In the Brewers fiscal year of 2008, they may spend more money than they will bring in. Assuming that is true, it's not going to stop the Brewers from making other acquisitions to improve the team this year if the team identifies a need and finds a match that makes sense. That's really all that is being reported.

 

I guess there's a question of why Mark even mentioned it. I know some business owners that love the Brewers and love what Mark has done to improve the club. They will go out of their way to buy Brewers gear at MP because they know that in some small way that the Brewers and Mark will benefit from that. Maybe Mark is just letting us know that he appreciates the support the Brewers are getting and that the team is extending its budget this year to improve it more. He probably knows that by doing so, some in the community will dig a little deeper in their pockets to support the Brewers.