Attanasio: Melvin still looking

[2008 world champs]

What is the consensus that we prefer Marte over Durham...I think the Giants are going to be reluctant to give up anybody because sadly, they are still in the race..

[joepepsi]

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?

Yes you are right. My wife is in sales and about this time last year was told her company was turning a profit, sales were up, big things were happening and she'd be rewarded at the end of the year. At the end of the year, after several meetings between the President and his accountant, she was told the company had actually lost money and there would be no bonuses this year.

 

It is in every company's best interest to not show a profit in any given year. A friend of mine works in the business office of a company that has annual sales in excess of $40 million. At the end of each year they funnel money everywhere to hide the profits from the tax man. The principal owner has several smaller "phantom" companies to absorb profits from the main company. By the time all the fund shifting is done, the company pays almost nothing in state and federal tax. There is little advantage to showing a profit on the books.....that doesn't mean people aren't getting wealthy off a business.

 

[TooLiveBrew]

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.

 

Isn't this a bit like buying a pack of red pens & hoping that one of them really writes with black ink? I'm not saying that I know anything about finances in specific, however, in general MLB owners have the chance to & most often do muddy the waters when it comes to profitablility.

[kramnoj]

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.

 

Isn't this a bit like buying a pack of red pens & hoping that one of them really writes with black ink? I'm not saying that I know anything about finances in specific, however, in general MLB owners have the chance to & most often do muddy the waters when it comes to profitablility.

 

No. It's nothing like it. It's treating an individual as an individual based on their words and their actions rather than assume a stereotype. Attanasio has done things to show that he is different than other owners. He has given fans a free game. He sits in the stands and talks to fans rather than secluding himself all the time in a luxury suite (some other owners may do it, but I don't think it's standard practice).

 

There isn't any dispute that we don't have access to all the books to determine where the negative cash flow may be. But that doesn't really matter, and I'm not sure why people feel the need to point it out. There are franchises that pocket revenue sharing money and don't improve the team. They deserve to be criticized for failing to provide a worthy product. But that isn't the case with Attanasio.

[TooLiveBrew]

Attanasio has done things to show that he is different than other owners. He has given fans a free game. He sits in the stands and talks to fans rather than secluding himself all the time in a luxury suite (some other owners may do it, but I don't think it's standard practice).

 

Other owners do things like these or do these exact things. Aside from that, these have nothing to do with financial reporting. I don't begrudge your thinking of Attanasio as an individual, I just don't think it's very likely that someone that has been so successful in high finance is going to come in & miss on a chance to better his financial situation by hiding profits, when that's the common practice in business in general, let alone baseball. That's where I get the 'black pen in a pack of red ones' analogy.

 

 

There are franchises that pocket revenue sharing money and don't improve the team. They deserve to be criticized for failing to provide a worthy product. But that isn't the case with Attanasio.

 

The talk, as far as I can tell, has been about whether or not Attanasio's claim that the Brewers are going to be in the red this season, not whether or not he uses revenue sharing to improve the team. Just because Attanasio isn't as scummy as some doesn't mean he's not scummy enough to do something that every other MLB owner does (hiding profits)

[kramnoj]

The team formerly known as the Devil Rays gave free parking for a season, IIRC, to try and boost attendance. I'm not familiar with any other owner recently giving away a free game.

 

I'm not even sure why there's a discussion about paper loss, or interest, or debt, or "hiding profits" and I really don't understand why scummy has been introduced into the conversation. Just because a team wants to pay off its debt load doesn't mean it's not real and doesn't take away from the profits that a team makes in a given year.

 

It would be one thing if Attanasio came out and said the team was losing money and had to sell off talent on the cheap and couldn't afford to sign any free agents. Instead, Mark is saying something quite different. He's saying the team is still looking to improve and he's said that the CC deal may put the team in the red this season. People are needlessly stating the obvious without actually addressing the point. The team is still looking to make this team better, even it means that this year's budget will be exceeded. I think that's great and I can't ask for anything more out of an owner.

[TooLiveBrew]

The team is still looking to make this team better, even it means that this year's budget will be exceeded. I think that's great and I can't ask for anything more out of an owner.

 

Oh, for certain. I just think it's a sort of financial semantics that's been bandied about -- some people are skeptical of whether or not this will really put the Brewers in the red or not. I think, given the history of baseball finances, that's a justifiable position... whether anyone believes Attanasio is hiding profits or not. Either way, it's not all that important, is it? Could the argument be made that 'hiding profits' benefits the product on the field in the long run? I'm in over my head on the finances talk, so I'm going to bow out... I'll be interested if anyone can discuss whether or not 'hiding profits' could theoretically help put a better product on the field.

[snyttri]

Mark A. can't say the Brewers are making a profit every year and pull off an unprecedented ticket price hike that might be coming next year without fueling discontent The club is close to maxing out in attendance and they may think they need a $100,000,000 payroll to beat the Cubs. People see that unheard of money is already being spent on the Brewers by fans and the need for high ticket prices might not be bought into unless the groundwork is laid.

 

On their boards White Sox fans still complain about their new high ticket prices even though they have gotten results. Brewers ticket prices might be following suit with or without the results. Mark A. thankfully may be too ambitious to give up most of his good players Oakland style. Brewers attendance and merchandise sales are big market now and other big market things, good and bad, may follow.

[FVBrewerFan]

Who knows when the Brewers' TV contract expires? I would have to believe they could see quite a bump in revenue next time around. They could even get creative and launch their own channel. Go directly to Time Warner and Comcast, and let some over-the air channel buy the rights to broadcast to cover those without cable. They could even tean up with the Bucks.

 

I'll tell you, if this team ever starts going in reverse attendance will plummet. As ticket prices continue to get crazy, most casual fans won't go out more than once or twice, if at all, unless they're winning. I would prefer that revnue come from advertisers rather than ticket price increases.

[obobo55]

Just an observation. I am going to be in Colorado in August and was hoping to take in a game at Coors. I looked at their prices and was shocked. Almost any seat there outside of the "rockpile" was over $20 and the vast majority were over $35. I have a hard time justifying paying anything over 20 for a Brewer game and take advantage of all the cheap options available (5-county, Spring madness, BP cards, etc). I truly hope that the Brewers are not forced to price their tickets like the Rockies do as it is tough enough for me to justify paying for the gas to fuel my trip from Madison.

[danzig6767]

Just because a team wants to pay off its debt load doesn't mean it's not real and doesn't take away from the profits that a team makes in a given year.

The thing is though, Mark really isn't paying off the "team's debt load", he's paying off his and the ownership groups debt load because they are the Milwaukee Brewers. If you say buy a company for 150 million and assume a 25 million dollar debt, you basically are paying 175 million for the company. If you then pay off that debt over three years and then decide to resell the company, it's roughly worth an extra 25 million because the new buyer doesn't have to take on that 25 million dollar debt that you did.

So if Mark is able to pay off all the debt he assumed when buying the team because all of the revenue coming in allowed for it, he's just pretty much choosing to eliminate his own debt vs putting the profits in his pocket. Either way, the bottom line is still the same, he's worth more money because of it and raises the value of the franchise. If you're 20,000 in debt and i gave you 10,000 dollars, you choosing to take that 10 grand to pay off debt vs putting it in your bank account doesn't mean you aren't still ahead 10,000 dollars.

It would be one thing if Attanasio came out and said the team was losing money and had to sell off talent on the cheap and couldn't afford to sign any free agents. Instead, Mark is saying something quite different. He's saying the team is still looking to improve and he's said that the CC deal may put the team in the red this season. People are needlessly stating the obvious without actually addressing the point. The team is still looking to make this team better, even it means that this year's budget will be exceeded. I think that's great and I can't ask for anything more out of an owner.

I think you're taking this debate the wrong way and thinking we don't like Attanasio as the owner or that we hate he's making a ton of cash off the team. I'm very very glad he's the Brewers owner and also feel he has every right to make the money he's making. He not only has shown a willingness to spend money on the team, i like how smart he's been in the way he's transformed unprofitable parts of Miller Park into places that are always full of fans. While Attanasio obviously want to make a nice chunk of change off the team, he's shown me that he badly wants to win and will allow Doug to spend when it makes sense. In the draft, he doesn't make Jack Z find players who will sign cheap, we sign our picks. With the fans Mark sure seems very open and personable. I have no real complaints with Attanasio and am glad he bought the team.

 

With that said, i just believe he's been and still is making more money off the Brewers than he wants to admit. Nothing more to it than that.

[nate82]

Who knows when the Brewers' TV contract expires? I would have to believe they could see quite a bump in revenue next time around. They could even get creative and launch their own channel. Go directly to Time Warner and Comcast, and let some over-the air channel buy the rights to broadcast to cover those without cable. They could even tean up with the Bucks.

I wouldn't mind having a Bucks and Brewers team up with a TV channel of their own kind of like the Rangers, Knicks, and Yankees have. I believe it is the Rangers and the Knicks that are on YES or are the Knicks on SNY? I can't remember and its been a long time since I have been to New York.