Craig Kimbrel

[Humans Need Water]

That's kind of my point. There's no cash realized in an asset appreciation unless the owner sells, which still doesn't improve cash flow for the business (the owner pockets it). And I agree that they have improved their borrowing position, but that again proves the point that they don't actually have the cash to dump into player payroll based solely on the argument of "well the franchise has tripled in value so they must have excess cash they can use on player payroll."

 

Also, the proceeds they got from their share of MLB's sale of BAMtech (I think around $50M) was basically used towards the Maryvale improvements ($60M) including the state of the art player development technologies.

 

Again, Mark A can certainly dip into his own pockets if he wishes to infuse more cash into the business to support a higher payroll, but we have to get away from the idea that just because the franchise has increased in value that we can support a larger payroll. It's not an open book situation like the Packers where we can study their financial statements to make that kind of determination.

Dude, if the value of the Brewers has more than tripled since MA took ownership it means the *Brewers Organization*, not MA personally (although he still is to a certain extent) is still making cash year over year. The team writes checks for players - MA isn't writing them personal checks. The Brewers Organization has been, and still is, making millions upon millions on the bottom line that can be put toward higher payrolls or whatever else they want.

 

And it was smart of them to take that 50M they got from BAMtech to renovate Maryvale, etc as that was essentially free money for them and they put it to great use. It meant they could keep the annual cash they've been saving (which they've said publicly now) and apply it to an increase payroll during this super competitive time frame they're in the middle of.

 

Your mind set is still "since the team has tripled in value it means *all* of that value isn't liquid" when that's absolutely not the case. This org is making cash annually. You fail to understand this.

[wallus]

Those expecting the Brewers to bump up payroll significantly are going to be disappointed.

[KeithStone53151]

Those expecting the Brewers to bump up payroll significantly are going to be disappointed.

 

I don't expect them to bump it too significantly. I just said I think they can. It's still a business, they aren't trying to break even. I wouldn't doubt if they had $50-60 million at the bottom of their income statement in 2016...their low payroll year.

 

I'm anticipating something like $110-120 opening day payroll with flexibility to go to maybe $125 or $130...those are the numbers I expect Stearns is working with.

[Point Beer Is Best]

That's kind of my point. There's no cash realized in an asset appreciation unless the owner sells, which still doesn't improve cash flow for the business (the owner pockets it). And I agree that they have improved their borrowing position, but that again proves the point that they don't actually have the cash to dump into player payroll based solely on the argument of "well the franchise has tripled in value so they must have excess cash they can use on player payroll."

 

Also, the proceeds they got from their share of MLB's sale of BAMtech (I think around $50M) was basically used towards the Maryvale improvements ($60M) including the state of the art player development technologies.

 

Again, Mark A can certainly dip into his own pockets if he wishes to infuse more cash into the business to support a higher payroll, but we have to get away from the idea that just because the franchise has increased in value that we can support a larger payroll. It's not an open book situation like the Packers where we can study their financial statements to make that kind of determination.

Dude, if the value of the Brewers has more than tripled since MA took ownership it means the *Brewers Organization*, not MA personally (although he still is to a certain extent) is still making cash year over year. The team writes checks for players - MA isn't writing them personal checks. The Brewers Organization has been, and still is, making millions upon millions on the bottom line that can be put toward higher payrolls or whatever else they want.

 

And it was smart of them to take that 50M they got from BAMtech to renovate Maryvale, etc as that was essentially free money for them and they put it to great use. It meant they could keep the annual cash they've been saving (which they've said publicly now) and apply it to an increase payroll during this super competitive time frame they're in the middle of.

 

Your mind set is still "since the team has tripled in value it means *all* of that value isn't liquid" when that's absolutely not the case. This org is making cash annually. You fail to understand this.

 

I'm a CPA - my job is literally to understand this. Allow me to explain my thinking of why we shouldn't assume a payroll increase, instead of telling me that I don't understand:

 

The valuation of the entity is not solely dependent on earnings. It's just not accurate from a valuation standpoint to say "if the value of the Brewers has more than tripled since MA took ownership it means the *Brewers Organization*, not MA personally (although he still is to a certain extent) is still making cash year over year." I've personally see company values significantly increase year-over-year while having poor or even negative earnings.

 

Or put in another way, you cannot assume that because the franchise has tripled in value, that their payroll can likewise triple. We simply cannot know this without looking at their books. That's my point - let's not all just assume they can ramp up payroll based solely on the franchise value. The formula that valuation companies use when appraising an ESOP or a private entity is to use the entity's EBITDA and then use a market multiple based on similar publicly traded companies. My argument is that the majority of the increase in the values of MLB franchises (it's not just Milwaukee, or even just MLB - all sports leagues have seen this increase) is likely a result of the market multiple increasing to a degree that exceeds the rate that EBITDA is increasing. Yes, the franchise worth more. No, that does not necessarily mean they have the free cash available to sustain a larger payroll. That's all I'm saying.

[PeaveyFury]

Unless participants on one side or the other of this debate has been able to review financial statements for the organization, let's just remember that both sides are expressing opinions and speculation, not facts. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if either is true.

[markedman5]

Lol

 

[wallus]

That would come out to around $250,000 per inning. If I ever have kids, they will throw 100mph.