msstate7
Well-known member
How do you know the revenue information is "false"? Couldn't that make it fraud?
MLB optimistic about starting season in late June
- Thread starter Acuña’s Bat Flip
- Start date
How do you know the revenue information is "false"? Couldn't that make it fraud?
It's only "fraud" if it were information they were required by law to provide.
Just a guess, but I'd expect the owners to open their books up for viewing the day AFTER Trump provides anyone a copy of his tax returns.
50PoundHead
Hessmania Forever
I think viewership would be through the roof and creative franchises could find a way to generate additional revenue because of the increased viewership. I don't know how advertising budgets will fare in many major corporations, but my guess is Home Depot and Lowe's are in the position to buy a boatload of ads.
striker42
Well-known member
When negotiating a contract you can't knowingly provide false information. If you do you open yourself up to getting sued for civil fraud. So I doubt anything provided to the players was false. That doesn't mean it wasn't heavily, heavily slanted.
There's no contract negotiation going on here. The owners made an offer - the players will either accept or reject it. They're more than welcome to make a counter proposal, but there's no law requiring the owners to provide anyone access to their financial records. Maybe congress gets involved and one day and threatens the anti-trust exemption to get a look at those books, but there's not much of a chance that happens.
The players have never had - and likely never will have - access to ownership's books.
striker42
Well-known member
This is absolutely a contract negotiation. All a contract is is an offer, acceptance, and consideration (something of value). When making any contract you can't intentionally provide false information for the other side to rely upon. Whether or not there's a law requiring you to provide the information is irrelevant.
The owners have absolutely no obligation to provide the players with any financial data of any kind. However, if the players want financial data and the owners do provide it, they can't provide false data. If they do and get caught then the players could sue them.
Who knows what the owners have told the players about their finances or what documents they've given them. Again, they have no obligation to give the players any financial data. They just can't give them false data if they do decide to give it.
Southcack77
Well-known member
Cause Max said so.
Southcack77
Well-known member
This might be worse than the sudden rise of internet experts on epidemiology.
Will be interesting to see if the contracts roll over to next season or they count and if that’s the case to see what moves we make to fill the roster next season.
I really worry without baseball this year that it will never be the same and take a major hit in interest from the fans.
Throw in the fact that basketball and football will be played this year and the gap will widen even further.
Baseball was already losing with the younger generation. This will be worse than 94. Expect even more juiced baseballs in 2021.
striker42
Well-known member
Dude, I'm an attorney in real life.
Here are the elements of fraud.
(1) a representation of fact; (2) its falsity; (3) its materiality; (4) the representer’s knowledge of its falsity or ignorance of its truth; (5) the representer’s intent that it should be acted upon by the person in the manner reasonably contemplated; (6) the injured party’s ignorance of its falsity; (7) the injured party’s reliance on its truth; (8) the injured party’s right to rely thereon; and (9) the injured party’s consequent and proximate injury.
If MLB provided false financial data to the players they hit every element.
In this fact pattern:
Baseball is representing facts.
Those facts are false.
The facts are material (players asking about them can make them material).
Baseball knows they're false.
Baseball is intending the players to rely on these facts in their decision making.
Players have no way of knowing if the data is correct.
The players have a right to rely on Baseball's representation of the facts.
The players would be injured by accepting a worse deal under the belief Baseball can't do better.
MLB isn't stupid enough to provide false data. Data with a spin? Sure, but not false data.
MadduxFanII
Swallowed by Mark Bowman
There are financial disclosure components to the CBA, and assuming the owners have met them they're under no obligation to provide any more data, no matter how much the players might want it.
But the problem is, the owners are going to the players and the public and saying, "If we play games in empty stadiums without slashing player salaries beyond what we've already agreed to, the game of baseball will die. America's pastime will perish, and marauders will spit on its grave. Every franchise will go out of business and every owner will be reduced to a Dickensian street urchin, pathetically pressing his nose against the glass of a fancy restaurant in hopes of catching sight of delicious, delicious food. The demon god Baphomet will ascend from his fiery chambers and lay waste the cities of man. The Crimson King shall climb to the top of the Dark Tower, and the unspeakable beings that live in the dark spaces between worlds will pour out and consume our own."
And the players are saying, "Uh, prove it."
And if the owners aren't willing to actually show the numbers, it's pretty reasonable to be skeptical of their claims.
But the problem is, the owners are going to the players and the public and saying, "If we play games in empty stadiums without slashing player salaries beyond what we've already agreed to, the game of baseball will die. America's pastime will perish, and marauders will spit on its grave. Every franchise will go out of business and every owner will be reduced to a Dickensian street urchin, pathetically pressing his nose against the glass of a fancy restaurant in hopes of catching sight of delicious, delicious food. The demon god Baphomet will ascend from his fiery chambers and lay waste the cities of man. The Crimson King shall climb to the top of the Dark Tower, and the unspeakable beings that live in the dark spaces between worlds will pour out and consume our own."
And the players are saying, "Uh, prove it."
And if the owners aren't willing to actually show the numbers, it's pretty reasonable to be skeptical of their claims.
Last edited:
Southcack77
Well-known member
You do a lot of labor and collective bargaining do you?
striker42
Well-known member
That wasn't the scenario I was commenting on. The scenario up the thread a bit was someone talking about MLB giving false financial data to the players and whether or not that could be fraud. There was some disagreement about that so I commented that yes, that would meet the definition of fraud and open MLB up to suit based on that. The CBA is a completely different animal that wasn't part of that original question.
I have no idea what data MLB has disclosed to the players, whether it was just what they have to do under the CBA or if they've given them more in these COVID negotiations. No matter what though, they're not going to be able to give demonstrably false data to the players to try to trick them into agreeing to a lower amount. I'm confident the law would have a remedy for that.
i kind of doubt they've provided them with any hard data, but they may have told them things during negotiations that were hyperbolic. would that be illegal?
striker42
Well-known member
Maybe. That would probably be an issue of fact for a fact finder (judge in a bench trial or a jury in a jury trial) to decide. Basically, it would be whether you could convince a jury that it was hyperbolic enough to be considered a false statement.
I would think if MLB provided them anything it would be selectively edited. Everything said would be true, it's just that they would only disclose information favorable to them.
striker42
Well-known member
The greater access to the Braves financials has been a source of contention between the players and MLB. The question is how much can be generalized from it. Not every team has a massive mixed use development as an income generating asset.