Braves Revenue Fell Almost $300M in 2020

[bravesfanforlife88]

Article

Obviously explains the budget restraints.

[thethe]

Article

Obviously explains the budget restraints.

What’s interesting is that the battery still had similar revenues YoY. I’m sure the majority of this are fixed rent payments but there has to be a variable component that stayed consistent despite the lack of fans.

I’m going to consider this a great sign for the future. The decreased revenues this year are effectively a one time event that wouldn’t impact forecasting too much over a 3-5 year plan and that is what will be used to set budgets.

[Enscheff]

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2021/...s-in-2020.html

Braves reported an operating loss of $49M in 2020, down from a profit of $54M in 2019. Depending on how you define “we lost X dollars”, the Braves lost $50M or $100M.

If you go with the $100M value as a representative value for all teams, that must be where MLB came up with that $2.8B-$3B loss in 2020. Perhaps they weren’t being as dishonest as I originally assumed.

[goldfly]

Guy who owns the team is worth over 7 billion dollars

Pays his liberty ceo 44 million a year


To put “losing” 45 million dollars into perspective

That’s the equivalent of losing $60 if you had $10,000

[Southcack77]

Guy who owns the team is worth over 7 billion dollars

Pays his liberty ceo 44 million a year


To put “losing” 45 million dollars into perspective

That’s the equivalent of losing $60 if you had $10,000

To put losing 45 million in persepective: it's losing 45 million dollars.

[PawPawMaxwell]

No one lost $45M. I posted before when the total losses were originally put out that the losses amounted to roughly 15 cents per share.

[Southcack77]

No one lost $45M. I posted before when the total losses were originally put out that the losses amounted to roughly 15 cents per share.

Corporations are people.

[Super]

Corporations are people.

lolz

[goldfly]

To put losing 45 million in persepective: it's losing 45 million dollars.

and here i was really breaking it down for people to understand

and i still got this type of reply

sigh

[jpx7]

To put losing 45 million in persepective: it's losing 45 million dollars.

This is a dumb response.

[GovClintonTyree]

and here i was really breaking it down for people to understand

and i still got this type of reply

sigh

****ers

[Southcack77]

This is a dumb response.

To put losing 45 million in perspective:

PERS -- losing 45 million -- PECTIVE

[jpx7]

To put losing 45 million in perspective:

PERS -- losing 45 million -- PECTIVE

This is even dumber.

[Southcack77]

This is even dumber.

Yes!

[Southcack77]

Not quite as dumb as suggesting losing 45m is the equivalent of a 20$ bill to a rich person. That's dumb. Wealthy people care a lot about money. As do their shareholders.

[chop2chip]

Guy who owns the team is worth over 7 billion dollars

Pays his liberty ceo 44 million a year


To put “losing” 45 million dollars into perspective

That’s the equivalent of losing $60 if you had $10,000

I understand what you mean from a relative sense, but it’s sort of discounting human’s psychological ability to comprehend large numbers.

Also, it’s worth noting that this isn’t Malone’s money that was lost, it was Liberty the corporation and corporations are poisoned with middle management executives that make too much money not to stress about any loss.

[jpx7]

Not quite as dumb as suggesting losing 45m is the equivalent of a 20$ bill to a rich person. That's dumb. Wealthy people care a lot about money. As do their shareholders.

lol

Just stop with this drivel. Losing $4.50 is a lot if you have $10 to your name. Losing $45m is not a lot when you have tens of billions in assets and your overall corporation brings in billions in revenue in a normal year (and over $10b just in 2019).

I don't give a **** how much they "care" about it (as if that's a useful metric in any way?)—we're talking strictly about relative quantities, which you either can't or (I suspect) willfully won't understand. Just sophomorically and tautologically saying "well, derp, $45m is $45m" is unproductive—and, again, I suspect you know that, but would rather derp around in service of some strange and ultimately meaningless point.

[sturg33]

lol

Just stop with this drivel. Losing $4.50 is a lot if you have $10 to your name. Losing $45m is not a lot when you have tens of billions in assets and your overall corporation brings in billions in revenue in a normal year (and over $10b just in 2019).

I don't give a **** how much they "care" about it (as if that's a useful metric in any way?)—we're talking strictly about relative quantities, which you either can't or (I suspect) willfully won't understand. Just sophomorically and tautologically saying "well, derp, $45m is $45m" is unproductive—and, again, I suspect you know that, but would rather derp around in service of some strange and ultimately meaningless point.

Should they not care about losing $45m?

How much would they need to lose for you to be OK with them not being happy about it?

How many years consecutively can they lose money before they should start caring?

[Enscheff]

Should they not care about losing $45m?

How much would they need to lose for you to be OK with them not being happy about it?

How many years consecutively can they lose money before they should start caring?

Where did anyone state they shouldn't care, fat ass? The discussion is about relative loss, not that they "shouldn't care".

Spend more time pretending to be in charge of employees and out eating Bowman, and less time creating silly strawmen arguments.

Having said that, we all know companies will not allow themselves to lose money for long. That wasn't even remotely the point.