Suntrust Park Begins To Take Shape

bravos4evr said:
hahaha that's funny. In the long run tho, I think the county will be glad they did it. I bet tax revenue increases and jobs. More out of towners will come to that park since it isn't in such a ****hole like The Ted is.
Click to expand...

So much this. however, will they resend the tax hike... I didn't read the link.. so if this is a termed tax hike, then No biggie. but if it is a 'lets raise X tax 1%'... those seem to never go away. But I agree, the county will make a lot of $$ off this park.
 
Hopefully the team will too. They run on revenue with no added $$$ from ownership so let us hope that the year round revenue streams pay off and we can AT LEAST go back to being a top 10 payroll team again. I'm not concerned with chasing every big free agent, but it was nice to know that if we wanted one we could go buy one if we needed too.
 
bravos4evr said:
Hopefully the team will too. They run on revenue with no added $$$ from ownership so let us hope that the year round revenue streams pay off and we can AT LEAST go back to being a top 10 payroll team again. I'm not concerned with chasing every big free agent, but it was nice to know that if we wanted one we could go buy one if we needed too.
Click to expand...

And at least have some hope of keeping guys we develop.
 
I know we're hearing bright and sunny things about payroll, but I'm not inclined to believe anything said under Liberty ownership until the checks clear.

The stadium already soaked up all the "park money" for Cobb County, so a tax hike is a comin' to pay for the other parks.

That's a real confluence of winning concepts—Cobb County government, corporate ownership of the Braves, and public stadium financing for pro sports teams.
 
Julio3000 said:
I know we're hearing bright and sunny things about payroll, but I'm not inclined to believe anything said under Liberty ownership until the checks clear.

The stadium already soaked up all the "park money" for Cobb County, so a tax hike is a comin' to pay for the other parks.

That's a real confluence of winning concepts—Cobb County government, corporate ownership of the Braves, and public stadium financing for pro sports teams.
Click to expand...

Liberty does not set payroll nor leech money off the team. The Braves operate on revenue. I know one of the accountants who did the diligence in the TW/LM stock swap that included the Braves. MLB forced LM to sign an agreement to neither slash payroll, relocate the team or interfere in a manner detrimental to the team as part of the agreement to let the rather unusual deal get approved by the owners. LM went one further and signed an agreement leaving all baseball operations including setting payroll...etc in the hand of JS and Terry McGuirk. The manner in which LM is run would require a shareholder's meeting to approve taking any funds or adding any directly anyway. They can use any Braves loses or profits to offset gain or losses from other parts of the corp. on the books, but they can't meddle with the team.
 
bravos4evr said:
Liberty does not set payroll nor leech money off the team. The Braves operate on revenue. I know one of the accountants who did the diligence in the TW/LM stock swap that included the Braves. MLB forced LM to sign an agreement to neither slash payroll, relocate the team or interfere in a manner detrimental to the team as part of the agreement to let the rather unusual deal get approved by the owners. LM went one further and signed an agreement leaving all baseball operations including setting payroll...etc in the hand of JS and Terry McGuirk. The manner in which LM is run would require a shareholder's meeting to approve taking any funds or adding any directly anyway. They can use any Braves loses or profits to offset gain or losses from other parts of the corp. on the books, but they can't meddle with the team.
Click to expand...

Yes, and I'm not really sure what your point is.
 
Julio3000 said:
Yes, and I'm not really sure what your point is.
Click to expand...

that at least our ownership doesn't meddle, slash payroll or run the team into the ground. I prefer distant, uninterested ownership to the Marlins situation, or Peter Angelos in Baltimore.

and this
I know we're hearing bright and sunny things about payroll, but I'm not inclined to believe anything said under Liberty ownership until the checks clear.
Click to expand...

you seem to imply that Liberty will cut payroll, when they don't have the ability to do so as long as the Braves operate within their revenue streams, LM will approve the budgets. (which is what they approve, total operational budget not just MLB payroll, McGuirk sets that)
 
Sounds like our hand may have been forced on this new stadium if payrolls were to even go up with inflation. We may have had to use outside revenue streams and advertising opportunities and extra tickets being sold to just tread water or even go up. Probably why we haven't heard anything concrete on payroll expectations.

It's a gamble as well.
 
bravos4evr said:
that at least our ownership doesn't meddle, slash payroll or run the team into the ground. I prefer distant, uninterested ownership to the Marlins situation, or Peter Angelos in Baltimore.

and this

you seem to imply that Liberty will cut payroll, when they don't have the ability to do so as long as the Braves operate within their revenue streams, LM will approve the budgets. (which is what they approve, total operational budget not just MLB payroll, McGuirk sets that)
Click to expand...

No, not that they will cut payroll, but that the promised payroll bump will be underwhelming.

I prefer distant, uninterested ownership to the Marlins situation, or Peter Angelos in Baltimore.

Sure. Is it possible to have an ownership group that isn't like Angelos or Loria? I dunno, ask the last 10 WS champions. Hell, ask the last 20.

In fact, when was the last time a distant, uninterested corporate owner won a World Series?
 
Coming back around to something that we haven't discussed in a long time... That was a weird ass deal, man. Stock swap ? For a MLB Franchise? Wtf?
 
Julio3000 said:
No, not that they will cut payroll, but that the promised payroll bump will be underwhelming.

I prefer distant, uninterested ownership to the Marlins situation, or Peter Angelos in Baltimore.

Sure. Is it possible to have an ownership group that isn't like Angelos or Loria? I dunno, ask the last 10 WS champions. Hell, ask the last 20.

In fact, when was the last time a distant, uninterested corporate owner won a World Series?
Click to expand...

Yes, a distant, uninterested corporate owner is NOT what you want. I think that's pretty clear.
 
Julio3000 said:
No, not that they will cut payroll, but that the promised payroll bump will be underwhelming.

I prefer distant, uninterested ownership to the Marlins situation, or Peter Angelos in Baltimore.

Sure. Is it possible to have an ownership group that isn't like Angelos or Loria? I dunno, ask the last 10 WS champions. Hell, ask the last 20.

In fact, when was the last time a distant, uninterested corporate owner won a World Series?
Click to expand...

IDK.... but being that winning in the playoffs is a crap shoot, I would look at how many corporate owned teams have made the playoffs. Braves did several times under TW (and they sucked wayy more than LM)

Coming back around to something that we haven't discussed in a long time... That was a weird ass deal, man. Stock swap ? For a MLB Franchise? Wtf?
Click to expand...

It's a damn odd deal, but TW wanted to buy back much of their stock, LM wanted the cash, (and to take advantage of a tax avoidance loophole that was soon closing) so to make the deal match up on paper as an investment swap rather than a sale, TW threw in the Braves and some hobby magazine publisher! We will probably never see it's like again considering the tax hole has been closed.
 
Tapate50 said:
Coming back around to something that we haven't discussed in a long time... That was a weird ass deal, man. Stock swap ? For a MLB Franchise? Wtf?
Click to expand...

Nothing screams "winning sports franchise" like being a tax break for a remote media conglomerate.
 
bravos4evr said:
IDK.... but being that winning in the playoffs is a crap shoot, I would look at how many corporate owned teams have made the playoffs. Braves did several times under TW (and they sucked wayy more than LM)
Click to expand...

Ok, let's do that.

The TW Braves, which were a legacy of the Ted years. Don't need to rehash that story. Something something the economics of baseball stinks.
The Nintendo Mariners, once or twice.
The Tribune Cubs, a handful of times in 30 years. Cubs fans didn't love the Trib ownership, but at least it was a local company.
Maybe the Fox Dodgers once? I don't remember, but I know those years weren't looked upon fondly by LA fans.

Miss any?
 
Julio3000 said:
Ok, let's do that.

The TW Braves, which were a legacy of the Ted years. Don't need to rehash that story. Something something the economics of baseball stinks.

The Nintendo Mariners, once or twice.

The Tribune Cubs, a handful of times in 30 years. Cubs fans didn't love the Trib ownership, but at least it was a local company.

Maybe the Fox Dodgers once? I don't remember, but I know those years weren't looked upon fondly by LA fans.

Miss any?
Click to expand...

Remember the Ken Griffey Jr. games on SNES and N64? Good times.
 
bravos4evr said:
that at least our ownership doesn't meddle, slash payroll or run the team into the ground. I prefer distant, uninterested ownership to the Marlins situation, or Peter Angelos in Baltimore.

and this

you seem to imply that Liberty will cut payroll, when they don't have the ability to do so as long as the Braves operate within their revenue streams, LM will approve the budgets. (which is what they approve, total operational budget not just MLB payroll, McGuirk sets that)
Click to expand...

Not that it really makes any short term difference BUT Liberty can and does influence payroll. They may not set spending, relying on McGuirk and the Johns to do that. But they DO set the comp packages for McGuirk and the Johns. So they tell McGuirk "if you show an x dollar profit, your bonus is Y or if a loss then no Bonus, etc. Liberty ultimately doesn't care what the SG&A is so much as the EBITDA. If Liberty tells McGuirk that if he shows a $20M profit then he is in line for a $5M bonus on top of his $1M salary, that's a pretty big incentive to find a way to show that profit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top