$2 Billion for the Dodgers?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: $2 Billion for the Dodgers?

    Forbes just estimated the value of the Dodgers at $1.4 billion.  They only missed by $600 million.  Unbelievable.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from jete02fan. Show jete02fan's posts

    Re: $2 Billion for the Dodgers?

    man, Magic and his group have some serious cheese...good for them..Cool
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from tomnev. Show tomnev's posts

    Re: $2 Billion for the Dodgers?

    I am sure McCourt is giving a saute to all the people would mocked him as incompetent and ruiner of the Dodgers.....even after he pays the ex, he still walks away with over 1B in profit over what he paid......that will build alot more parking lots.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from JB-3. Show JB-3's posts

    Re: $2 Billion for the Dodgers?

    In Response to Re: $2 Billion for the Dodgers?:
    [QUOTE] McCourt had a $3B deal in place with Fox, MLB prevented him from finalizing it. He cashes out for $2B, pays all his creditors, settles with his ex wife and still controls the parking lots. He got screwed by MLB...the other owners continue to ramp up the paper value of their franchises, the Dodgers appreciated 6 times in eight years, the net effect is owners can borrow against or sell at ridiculous profits. The Players Union continues to miss this side of the revenue stream, it's not the gate, it's not the Network deals, it's the appreciation baby!
    Posted by YOUKILLUS20[/QUOTE]

    The $3 Billion deal was a 30 year tv deal, MLB had a problem with him pulling forward such a large amount of revenue because it would criple the franchise long term.  Assuming even just a 5% annual return, which is nothing compared to the appreciation of a mlb franchise as you've pointed out, the present value of that $3 Billion tv deal was just under $1.54 Billion.  Over $500 Million less than the Fox deal.  Unless the $3 Billion for Fox was reported as present value, but I can't imagine the tv deal would have been almost $200 Million per year
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from SinceYaz. Show SinceYaz's posts

    Re: $2 Billion for the Dodgers?

    In Response to Re: $2 Billion for the Dodgers?:
    [QUOTE] McCourt had a $3B deal in place with Fox, MLB prevented him from finalizing it. He cashes out for $2B, pays all his creditors, settles with his ex wife and still controls the parking lots. He got screwed by MLB...the other owners continue to ramp up the paper value of their franchises, the Dodgers appreciated 6 times in eight years, the net effect is owners can borrow against or sell at ridiculous profits. The Players Union continues to miss this side of the revenue stream, it's not the gate, it's not the Network deals, it's the appreciation baby!
    Posted by YOUKILLUS20[/QUOTE]

    Youk, 
     
        Just heard a reason that MLB cancelled that deal.  It didn't really give the team it's own identity .... in other words, the tv/broadcast companies would become near equal partners, not just service providers. The control of the team would slip from the MLB to outside companies or entities.
        McCourt might have gotten money but the Dodgers would be weaker than ever. They need to fix up Dodger Stadium ... a cost of almost $345 million was mentioned. (An impossible sum, to me ... but that is what was said).
        

         Even still, the $2 million amount is overvalued.  A comparative value for the Yanquis was given at $5.75 billion .... and that was considered way too high.

       Source: Mike & Mike financial expert .... (I didn't get the name)

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from SinceYaz. Show SinceYaz's posts

    Re: $2 Billion for the Dodgers?

    In Response to Re: $2 Billion for the Dodgers?:
    [QUOTE]Forbes just estimated the value of the Dodgers at $1.4 billion.  They only missed by $600 million.  Unbelievable.
    Posted by Hfxsoxnut[/QUOTE]

    From what I just heard, that $1.4 is still a lot closer to what business minded folks think is the value.  There are people almost thunderstruck that the Guggenheim Partnership (or whatever) is willing to over pay by that huge percentage.

    The ticket sales have been stripped to the bone just to get people to come to the games, attendance has plummetted ... building the attendance and prices back up will be herculean ....
     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: $2 Billion for the Dodgers?

    Dodgers are a big market team with great tradition and a huge TV contract. They will get back into contention quickly and attendance will improve. 
     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: $2 Billion for the Dodgers?

    In response to "Re: $2 Billion for the Dodgers?": [QUOTE]Hank Williams will always be a legend in American Music. I may be wrong, but I think he had 40 #1 hit records by the time he died at 28. Kaw-Liga, Jambalaya, Hey Good Looking, Why Don't You Love Me, Move It On Over and the list goes on and on... Posted by carnie[/QUOTE] Too bad his son stinks. He grandson has some interesting music.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from JB-3. Show JB-3's posts

    Re: $2 Billion for the Dodgers?

    In Response to Re: $2 Billion for the Dodgers?:
    [QUOTE]The question on who controlled the ownership of the parking lots, held this deal up.  McCourt made his money on the seaport land he owned and eventually turned into parking lots.  He wanted to keep the lots around dodger stadium, but eventualy let them go. I cannot believe that he royally screwed up this franchise and still makes a pretty penny
    Posted by jackbu[/QUOTE]

    McCourt still controls the parking lots, just not for game days.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliamsjr. Show hankwilliamsjr's posts

    Re: $2 Billion for the Dodgers?

    Amusing to see a group of posters try and fake an understanding of the business of baseball. From the ownership group to the details of the deal, the media fed and filtered for advertsising revenue publishing report is a childishly misrepresentation of the true essence of the parties and the deal itself. 
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from YOUKILLUS20. Show YOUKILLUS20's posts

    Re: $2 Billion for the Dodgers?

    In Response to Re: $2 Billion for the Dodgers?:
    [QUOTE]The question on who controlled the ownership of the parking lots, held this deal up.  McCourt made his money on the seaport land he owned and eventually turned into parking lots.  He wanted to keep the lots around dodger stadium, but eventualy let them go. I cannot believe that he royally screwed up this franchise and still makes a pretty penny
    Posted by jackbu[/QUOTE]
     Where did he screw up? The current roster contains the league defacto MVP, and the Cy Young winner...
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from SinceYaz. Show SinceYaz's posts

    Re: $2 Billion for the Dodgers?

    In Response to Re: $2 Billion for the Dodgers?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: $2 Billion for the Dodgers? : I agree
    Posted by jackbu[/QUOTE]

    Though I really have no stake in the matter, I hope you both are right.  I immediately got a thrill to hear Magic was involved.  The man can do wonders.  I heard an interview with him today about his role.  Totally impressive - articulate, purposeful and since it's Magic, completely believable.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie's posts

    Re: $2 Billion for the Dodgers?

    In Response to Re: $2 Billion for the Dodgers?:
    [QUOTE]In response to "Re: $2 Billion for the Dodgers?": Too bad his son stinks. He grandson has some interesting music.
    Posted by BosoxJoe5[/QUOTE]He does, his first album was terrific.
     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliamsjr. Show hankwilliamsjr's posts

    Re: $2 Billion for the Dodgers?

    Not a Dodgers fan but as a baseball fan it is better when a historic franchise like the Dodgers is relevant, well run and competitive

    Dodgers were never irrelevant, and you are not a fan of English. You also are unable to convey an original thought, aping the comments of media pundits.
     

Share