• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: The Toronto Blue Jays

Wayward DP said:
not if the buyer is on Edward Rogers...
Click to expand...


...yeah, from the article:

If Rogers did decide to sell a portion of the Blue Jays to an individual, the sources said company chair Edward Rogers is a potential buyer. The vast majority of professional sports franchises are owned by wealthy individuals, rather than public companies.

Blue Jays executives already report to Mr. Rogers, and the 52-year-old is chair of the team. He is also its representative on Major League Baseball’s board. At Blue Jays spring training games in Dunedin, Fla., Mr. Rogers sits in the stands watching his sons serve as bat boys.
Click to expand...
 
MindzEye said:
In large markets?
Click to expand...
Toronto is a huge market but they’re usually middle of the pack in attendance and of course the only team that takes their revenue in CAD. I think it’s a cash cow for Rogers but I don’t necessarily assume that another owner would treat them that way.

Also Rogers has improved from the Ricciardi days to now where they seem to basically approve a top-10 budget and then mostly stay out of the way (with the very notable exception of Edward Rogers intervening to basically fire AA.) What if the next owner pulls the rug out from under a promising young team like Interbrew did to Gord Ash's late 90s Jays?

It could be a lot worse, is my main point.
 
Oh gawd, so right when we think we’re gonna finally get rid of Rogers and compete, he might get more control of the team to ensure we never win. Mint
 
LeafOfFaith said:
Aren't we top of the pack in attendance when we're winning?
Click to expand...
Sort of

year—attendance rank

2019-22nd
2018–13th
2017–5th
2016-3rd
2015-8th
2014-17th
2013-14th
2012-23rd
2011-25th
2010-26th

Strong correlation between winning and good attendance, and between losing and terrible attendance. But this doesn’t mean that a new owner will approve a top-5 or top-10 budget.

They could easily try to win on the cheap for 5-10 years. And companies that don’t have the extreme deep pockets of Rogers might not spend until attendance goes way up.

Shapiro and Atkins have had increasing budgets even as their attendance went off a cliff.
 
manny said:
Toronto is a huge market but they’re usually middle of the pack in attendance and of course the only team that takes their revenue in CAD. I think it’s a cash cow for Rogers but I don’t necessarily assume that another owner would treat them that way.

Also Rogers has improved from the Ricciardi days to now where they seem to basically approve a top-10 budget and then mostly stay out of the way (with the very notable exception of Edward Rogers intervening to basically fire AA.) What if the next owner pulls the rug out from under a promising young team like Interbrew did to Gord Ash's late 90s Jays?

It could be a lot worse, is my main point.
Click to expand...

Usually middle of the pack in performance too. Top of the league in attendance when we're winning and we were promised that the money would be there if we showed up the last time, remember? The building got full, and the money never came.

Could it be a lot worse? I struggle to see how. We've been about a league average payroll on average over the last 4-5 years and it was, funny enough, when we locked in a lot of spending while trying to actually win something that Ed shoved AA out the window.

Sure, some proper cunt could buy the club and treat us like Oakland North but that's about the only downside I see. Shit, just getting away from our broadcast daddy so that we can open ourselves up to real bidding on a one of a kind nation sized TV market deal would be a significant step forward. The Jays do massive ratings numbers but have a pedestrian TV deal that seems designed to keep more money in Rogers coffers.
 
MindzEye said:
Usually middle of the pack in performance too. Top of the league in attendance when we're winning and we were promised that the money would be there if we showed up the last time, remember? The building got full, and the money never came.

Could it be a lot worse? I struggle to see how. We've been about a league average payroll on average over the last 4-5 years and it was, funny enough, when we locked in a lot of spending while trying to actually win something that Ed shoved AA out the window.

Sure, some proper cunt could buy the club and treat us like Oakland North but that's about the only downside I see. Shit, just getting away from our broadcast daddy so that we can open ourselves up to real bidding on a one of a kind nation sized TV market deal would be a significant step forward. The Jays do massive ratings numbers but have a pedestrian TV deal that seems designed to keep more money in Rogers coffers.
Click to expand...
Yeah the attendance thing is a misdirect. Rogers makes bank on the tv rights that they collect $ on without the middle man.
 
Deckie007 said:
Yeah the attendance thing is a misdirect. Rogers makes bank on the tv rights that they collect $ on without the middle man.
Click to expand...
TV ratings are higher for the Jays than basically every other team other than the Yankees. That's where teams make their money these days - if the Jays didn't cheap out on TV contracts because Rogers shifts money around for accounting business, the Jays should be raking in like billion dollar TV deals.
 
UWHabs said:
TV ratings are higher for the Jays than basically every other team other than the Yankees. That's where teams make their money these days - if the Jays didn't cheap out on TV contracts because Rogers shifts money around for accounting business, the Jays should be raking in like billion dollar TV deals.
Click to expand...

I've seen a few breakdowns done on this and the gist seems to be that Rogers is trying to keep the Jays from paying a significant amount into the kitty for revenue share. MLB teams pay 48% of their local TV deal revenue into the sharing pot and the Jays aren't eligible to receive any of that back on account of they're having the largest market in MLB and all (Canada = Big). So the people are Rogers "negotiate" the right sized TV deal to keep MLB off of their backs, but not big enough that they're sending money out the door towards revenue sharing. The way Rogers sees it, they don't give a fuck which business line generates that extra money as long as they can keep it. So to their way of thinking, for the Jays to generate the amount of revenue they should (estimates vary, but it's a significant additional amount..50-80M or more annually), Rogers would lose 48% of that to revenue sharing...so instead of the Jays getting an extra ~25-40M to play with every year (which is really the difference between what Rogers has paid and what we wish they would pay), they see it as losing a big pile of money outside of the organization, so the baseball team gets fucked.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top