Master Index of Archived Threads


Fred Says Money Will Be Available

MFS62 Feb 14 2013 09:23 AM

But maybe not quite yet. Adam Rubin/ESPN Yesterday Fred Wilpon said of the financial troubles that have plagued the Mets over the past few seasons: "It's all in the rearview mirror." He added that the family's improved financial complexion also is the result of the rebound of real estate, his primary business, as well as stock-market gains and the thriving of SportsNet New York, the television network in which the family owns a majority stake. "It's all in the rearview mirror," Wilpon said about past financial woes Wednesday after arriving at the team's spring training complex. "... The family is in great shape. The family really is in great shape. Sometimes luck is the residue of design." Wilpon originally faced a $1 billion lawsuit regarding the Madoff scheme, but the settlement will result in the family ultimately having to pay no more than $60 million. Wilpon said the payroll, slashed in recent seasons under Alderson, could return to past levels if the team is prudent. The payroll went from a high of $148 million late in Omar Minaya's tenure as general manager to roughly $95 million last year. Wilpon pointed to bank debt as a primary reason for an un-New York-like payroll in recent years. The Mets have produced four straight losing seasons and have not reached the postseason since 2006. "It wasn't, as people have written, the reason," Wilpon said about the Madoff issue and payroll slashing. "It was a balance there, because we had to make sure the banks got paid off all of the debt. There's no one in my family -- there's the Katz family, the Wilpon family, kids -- [that now] has any personal bank debt. Zero. Everything has been paid. We don't owe a dollar to anybody. We have mortgages on buildings and stuff like that, but we don't owe a dollar. On other topics: • Wilpon said his expectations for the 2013 Mets do not match outside pessimism. "This team looks like basically a young team with some veterans, and hungry," Wilpon said. "I think Sandy and the staff did a terrific job of getting some real good prospects for the bullpen. ... I'm hopeful and optimistic. The hunger is throughout. And I think we have really good arms. You look at our pitching staff and, on paper, you've got to say they really have a good chance of producing W's. Any of the teams that have surprised people, whether it's Oakland last year -- just go through the last 10 years -- it's pitching that brings it up to that level. So I'm very encouraged about that." • The Mets do not plan to discuss extending manager Terry Collins' contract until the end of the season, when it is due to expire. "He's done an excellent job in all respects," Wilpon said. "He handles the public relations side very well. He's honest. You guys believe him. ... I think he knows talent. We will evaluate Terry at the end of the year, not only from where the club lands, but what his overall job was." • David Wright could be a Met for life. Wright signed an eight-year, $138 million extension in December. "David is a unique player. He's an All-Star," Wilpon said. "I think David is an All-Star in all things. He's a great person. To me, he's our [Derek] Jeter. And I think you need a core. I don't want to put it all on his shoulders. But he gets it. As far as I was concerned, he was not going anywhere." Later

Benjamin Grimm Feb 14 2013 09:33 AM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

The Mets do not plan to discuss extending manager Terry Collins' contract until the end of the season, when it is due to expire. Good! David Wright could be a Met for life. Wright signed an eight-year, $138 million extension in December. Wow! That's news! Other articles I've read today include Fred's use of the word "zimbo" when describing the real estate market in recent years. "Real estate has gone zimbo." Hopefully the Mets will move away from their recent zimboness. I know we all want Fred to go away, but it appears he's staying.

MFS62 Feb 14 2013 09:40 AM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

Fred doen't give a specific time frame for that spending. I hope that money isn't like a Unicorn - something we have heard about but will never see. Later

bmfc1 Feb 14 2013 11:27 AM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

Nice of Fred to say this after the last big money FA has been signed. There's no way of proving what he said until either July, if the Mets are in contention and they add a big salary, or next fall when the FA signing period begins anew.

Edgy MD Feb 14 2013 11:37 AM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

They can certainly add payroll or invest in the team otherwise before July.

bmfc1 Feb 14 2013 11:57 AM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

Edgy MD wrote: They can certainly add payroll or invest in the team otherwise before July. How so? By signing Michael Bourn--oh that's right, they didn't. A big trade? A new scoreboard? Maybe they used the new found money designing those neat Mr. Met hats.

Benjamin Grimm Feb 14 2013 12:00 PM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

The only way they can add significant payroll between now and after the World Series would in fact be through a trade, and that's something that's possible. It's probably more likely in July than in March, but it can happen at any point.

bmfc1 Feb 14 2013 12:02 PM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

BG: I agree--that was one of the two ways I suggested in my earlier post. That's why Fred's statement yesterday was vapid.

Edgy MD Feb 14 2013 12:18 PM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

bmfc1 wrote: Edgy MD wrote: They can certainly add payroll or invest in the team otherwise before July. How so? By signing Michael Bourn--oh that's right, they didn't. A big trade? A new scoreboard? Maybe they used the new found money designing those neat Mr. Met hats. Is bitter sarcasm just the only way you address me any more? Yes, as you acknowledge more politely to Grimm, for some reason, the team can add salary through a trade. That can happen before July.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Feb 14 2013 12:21 PM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

I barely get riled up anymore by anything Fred says because I understand by now it's all varying degrees of vague bullshit with him every time he opens his mouth. Some of it is sincere, some calculated, some uninformed, and much of it is serving some broader Wilponian purpose (he needs to look like a successful real estate developer, he wants to prove he understands baseball like a true fan, he wants to sell tickets, he wants to look innocent of fraud, he wants to sell a share of the team, he wants what he says to come out in a certain way because of some other thing, etc etc). I don't for a second doubt much of what he says could be and often is true under the right interpretation or circumstance, but this notion of expecting every remark of his to be a kind of promise is useful only if you want to torture yourself. The only thing you can count on with Fred is that his public pronouncements will get him into some trouble.

Benjamin Grimm Feb 14 2013 12:23 PM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

I agree. I don't see the value in carefully parsing his words. He says that the Mets will spend competitively? I'm happy to hear it, because it's better than hearing the alternative, but I'll only be convinced that it's true when it happens.

bmfc1 Feb 14 2013 12:26 PM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

Edgy MD wrote: Is bitter sarcasm just the only way you address me any more? The bitter sarcasm was meant for Fred and all things Fred.

Edgy MD Feb 14 2013 12:28 PM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

Well, you were directing it at me and I'm really fatigued with being addressed like I'm his surrogate.

G-Fafif Feb 14 2013 12:37 PM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

As much as we as fans lap up every morsel of Mets pronouncement, I think they'd all do themselves a favor -- Fred, Jeff, Sandy, Terry to a certain extent -- if they'd exercise restraint in talking or, more directly, STFU. I don't mean that as a slap at them. I mean it as a communications strategy. Manage the media message, for crissake. They're no better at it now than they were under Omar or Phillips. Unless their goal is just to be talked about, period. Then it's working. Only Duquette seemed to understand the value of keeping quiet and getting something done, though I suppose it didn't do him much good in the eyes of his employers.

Edgy MD Feb 14 2013 12:44 PM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

I don't know much about media strategy, but I find Sandy's highly technical ambiguity to be fascinating. Putting little to no personal stock in any of it, I find that it reads as sort of an Ivy League version of Stengelian doublespeak. He stuffs a bunch of learned polysyllabics into a paragraph that amounts to "It could certainly go this way, but I wouldn't expect that if I were you, because you might find it goes another way. We have a number of very specific things intricately mapped out and might do none of them, which would certainly be the result of a cohesive and comprehensive strategy. Was that helpful to you?"

John Cougar Lunchbucket Feb 14 2013 12:53 PM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

I heard the whole Sandy-Francessa thing last night. I detected in Sandy a clear whiff of obligation to his appearance on that show (which incidentally began with an announcement that All-Star Six-Packs Are Now Available: Call 507-TIXX). Mike to his credit is Sandy's advocate in making it seem as if that's not the case. With Fred, I get the sense that inconsistency and disappearing/reappearing accountability is just the way it is with him and he's the one in charge.

batmagadanleadoff Feb 14 2013 01:13 PM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

But maybe not quite yet. Adam Rubin/ESPN "It's all in the rearview mirror," Wilpon said about past financial woes Wednesday after arriving at the team's spring training complex. "... The family is in great shape. The family really is in great shape. Sometimes luck is the residue of design." [...] There's no one in my family -- there's the Katz family, the Wilpon family, kids -- [that now] has any personal bank debt. Zero. Everything has been paid. We don't owe a dollar to anybody. We have mortgages on buildings and stuff like that, but we don't owe a dollar. Eff and Jeff Wilpon might not be carrying any personal debt, but the team and SNY still owe a combined $billion. Mets Owners Are Debt Free But Team And Its Network Owe Over $1 Billion New York Mets owner Fred Wilpon recently told ESPN that he and his partner, Saul Katz, no longer have any personal debt. But don’t expect the New York Metsto begin spending like a big-market team any time soon. The baseball team and the regional sports network of which it owns 65%, SportsNet New York, have over $1 billion in debt combined, according to sources. The Mets have about $430 million of debt while SNY has near $750 million of debt. Of that $750 million, the owners of the Mets are on the hook for some $450 million, putting their total obligations near $900 million. A phone call and email to the team for confirmation of the debt figures were not returned. With the combined enterprise values of the Mets and SNY around $2 billion, leverage is above 50%. Moreover, the team pays $50 million a year in annual ballpark PILOT bond and rent payments that come from Citi Field’s revenue. Attendance at Citi Field is down significantly the past three years. Standard & Poor’s stated in a December report in which it downgraded Citi Field’s bonds one notch, to two levels below investment grade, “The negative outlook reflects our expectation that the project cash flow will have slight cash flow declines in the near future before it begins to stabilize.” Despite signing David Wright in the off-season to a $138 million extension, the team’s payroll will likely remain in the middle of the league the next few seasons. GM Sandy Alderson has his work cut out. http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian ... 1-billion/

batmagadanleadoff Feb 14 2013 05:11 PM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

Wilpon puts Mets money woes 'in the rear-view mirror,' all evidence to the contrary By Howard Megdal 4:20 pm Feb. 13, 2013 Wednesday, February 13, 2013 was a landmark day for Fred Wilpon and the New York Mets. After years of crushing debt brought on by the evaporation of their holdings with Bernie Madoff, Wilpon took in the Florida sunshine, smiled, and announced to reporters that the team's financial difficulties were over. "It's all in the rear-view mirror," Wilpon said, after arriving at the team's spring-training complex in Port St. Lucie. "The family is in great shape," he said. "The family really is in great shape. Sometimes luck is the residue of design." This would be great news for Mets fans, who have watched their team decline as the Wilpons' problems ravaged the Mets' payroll. If it were true. Which publicly available evidence suggests it isn't. "It wasn't, as people have written, the reason," Wilpon said about bank debt. "It was a balance there, because we had to make sure the banks got paid off all of the debt. There's no one in my family"—there's the Katz family, the Wilpon family, kids—"[that now] has any personal bank debt. Zero. Everything has been paid. We don't owe a dollar to anybody. We have mortgages on buildings and stuff like that, but we don't owe a dollar." If that's true, it all happened since the beginning of this week. According to public Uniform Commercial Code filings, the following people had outstanding debt as of Monday, February 11, 2013: Fred Wilpon, Saul Katz (Fred's brother-in-law and fellow partner in Sterling Equities), Judith Wilpon (Fred's wife), Richard Wilpon (Fred's brother), The Fred Wilpon Family Trust, The Fred Wilpon 2003 Descendants Trust, and numerous other Wilpon and Katz family members. That's beside the point, really: it is a pair of enormous debts against a pair of Sterling Equities' holdings that have caused ownership to dedicate available resources toward servicing that debt annually, and whose principal is coming due. (The Mets declined to comment on whether Wilpon's comments applied to either of those debts.) U.C.C. filings confirm that the $320 million debt due against the team in June 2014 is an active debt. And Wilpon and his partners already owed $450 million against their 65 percent ownership stake in S.N.Y., due in 2015. Their latest loan, an additional $160 million secured in December, added to that total. For Sterling to be debt-free, Wilpon and his partners, less than two months after borrowing $160 million to help pay, among other things, day-to-day expenses, will have needed to come into possession of more than $900 million to take care of these two debts alone. Merely refinancing, or convincing lenders to push the due date back, wouldn't make them debt-free, according to any reasonable understanding of the term. And that doesn't even take into account the hundreds of millions in total left to pay on bonds issued to finance Citi Field. That total ran the Mets $43.7 million in 2011, at least that in 2012, and remains on the ledger for years to come. Just servicing those three debts cost more than $90 million in 2011, and more than $80 million in 2012. That service cost went down because when the Mets sold their $240 million in minority shares, $110 million went toward paying down the debt against the team, lowering it to the $320 million it currently sits at from $430 million. The rest went toward paying off loans that kept the team afloat ($40 million to Bank of America, $25 million to Major League Baseball), and servicing debt that remained. (This was confirmed by a source familiar with the team's plans at the time.) Accordingly, to perform the same servicing trick once again, the Mets needed that $160 million loan this past winter. Their diminishing ability to pull off that trick each winter is what led Irving Picard, trustee for the Bernie Madoff victims, to give up pursuing money from Wilpon and his partners, which he believed he'd never get, because they simply didn't have it. He would have been in a fight with the Wilpons' creditors. But Wilpon is saying that all the bank debt is now paid off, not just serviced, and not by those hundreds of millions in loans, but by all that money that had previously been spent on the Mets. "That's what made us tight," Wilpon said. "We were still getting revenues. Lots of revenues. But those revenues were going to pay off debt. That's done." Even after supposedly getting rid of the debt, though, Wilpon offered a caveat in terms of the Mets' ability to start increasing their payroll again. "This is, to me, a break-even business," Wilpon said. "I always strive to break even. I'm not looking to make any money. I strive to break even. So if [fans] don't show up, that's hard. So you have to balance it." The Mets lost $70 million in 2011, and then, after slashing payroll from $143 million to $91 million, lost $23 million in 2012. They did so while drawing 2.24 million fans, to watch a 74-win team. Then they added almost no new talent of note this winter, while trading Cy Young Award winner and fan favorite R.A. Dickey. They received some good young prospects in return, but it is highly unlikely that any of those players will materially contribute to a winning team in 2013. Standard and Poor's, when recently lowering the rating on Citi Field debt, estimated the Mets would lose eight percent more money in 2013 than they did in 2012. So while salaries get cleared from the books after 2013, such as the $31 million Johan Santana will earn and the $21 million the Mets still owe Jason Bay (and have publicly said they are counting on 2013 expenditures, though it was deferred), exactly how much of the freed-up money can go to improving the Mets is unclear, given continuing debt service and the reckoning of that $320 million in principal coming due in 2014, and then the well over $450 million due in 2015. It's not like this is the first time Wilpon claimed that everything would be smooth sailing moving forward. That's what he said in the days that followed the revelation of Bernie Madoff's fraud, long before the lawsuit. And that's what he said this time last year, when he made the same claims of solvency, denying any effect of the lawsuit at the start of spring training last season, or after the lawsuit was settled, when Wilpon and others in the Mets organization tried to pin the lack of spending on a lawsuit that, ultimately, won't cost them any money at all until at least 2016. The only way to clear the way for additional spending from Wilpon and his partners is if the debt isn't delayed, but if it just ceases to exist. And that's what Wilpon is suggesting is the case. "I don't know what the market will be at that point," Wilpon said. "But the payroll will be commensurate with anything we've ever done because we can do it. Remember, the people have to come to the ballpark obviously. If you have a competitive team, they will. Everything that was in the past, that you guys saw the pain that we went through, is gone. It's gone." It sure would be nice to think so. http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/s ... e-contrary

Frayed Knot Feb 14 2013 05:24 PM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

Oh good, I was waiting to see which side of this issue Medgal came down on.

Ashie62 Feb 14 2013 07:11 PM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

In this case I believe Wilpon over Medgal. In the interview my impression was Sandy saw Bourn as a poor investment rather than something that was unaffordable. I'm optimistic...

metsguyinmichigan Feb 15 2013 05:41 AM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

And, for all the talk about not signing a free agent, they did sign Wright to a $100 million+ extension. Just because they did it before he became a free agent doesn't mean they shouldn't get credit for it.

Gwreck Feb 15 2013 06:18 AM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

I don't disagree, and credit is due for getting the extension done, but I note that keeping Wright is not an increase in annual spending. They were already paying him $15M in 2012.

batmagadanleadoff Feb 15 2013 06:34 AM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

To tell you the truth, I was so uninterested by the Wright extension, and wouldn't have been half as bothered over Wright leaving as I was over the Dickey fiasco. He'll probably be past his prime and over the hill when the Mets are contenders again. And that's if the Mets are lucky and Wright doesn't blow out his back again next season. Because then, Wright'll be over the hill years before the Mets are contenders again. And that's assuming that the Mets can contend soon enough for the new watered down playoffs, which is no guarantee either. The Mets already got the best of Wright. Now they'll pay top dollar for his worst. My guess is that Wright has, tops, two all star caliber seasons left in his tank. And if so, they'll probably be wasted on a struggling team. Good thing the Mets are'nt into anymore Omaresque Bay/Santana type deals, because I'd bet anything that this new Wright deal will turn out to be more of the same. They signed Wright to avoid another fan revolution, is how I see it.

Vic Sage Feb 15 2013 08:13 AM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

Hey Batty, not for nuttin' (as they used to say in my old neighborhood), but is there anything the `Pons could do that you wouldn't hang them for? You give them crap for NOT spending (warranted), and now you give them crap for spending. I despise the current ownership group as much as anybody, and i think Megdal's Javert-like rants are more right than wrong about the current economic situation of the team, but the Wright deal was necessary, and not just from a PR perspective. He's not at the end of his career; he's right in the middle of his prime. Your notion that he has "2 good seasons left" is something you extricated from your rectal orifice. While obviously anybody can go south at any point, he's as likely to be sufficiently productive for at least the next 5 years as he is 2. And the dollars are not at such a level as many other star contracts, particularly with its structured deferments [he definitely gave them a hometown discount in this regard], such that they'll cripple the team when he finally falls off. From a historical perspective, he is their best position player ... EVER. He will soon hold every single offensive team record. It is important that such a player be a lifetime Met and not shown the door at his peak. And the "Dickey fiasco"? Puleez. They sold high on a guy they picked up off the scrap heap, trading from their only position of strength and depth to get key pieces that will accelerate the rebuild. Your agenda steers your rationale.

bmfc1 Feb 15 2013 08:20 AM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

Fred made up a new word: http://bats.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/1 ... ing-zimmo/

batmagadanleadoff Feb 15 2013 09:29 AM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

Vic Sage wrote: Hey Batty, not for nuttin' (as they used to say in my old neighborhood), but is there anything the `Pons could do that you wouldn't hang them for? I'll give them credit for mothballing the hideous black drop-shadow pajama tops. Even though they couldnt'a mothballed 'em without first approving them. For fourteen years. An affront to good taste and team tradition. Longest running unis in team history. I don't know what's uglier: the black unis or the Citi Field scoreboards? Vic Sage wrote: [Wright's]s not at the end of his career; he's right in the middle of his prime. Your notion that he has "2 good seasons left" is something you extricated from your rectal orifice. You're absolutely right. And if not from my rectal orifice, then perhaps from my eyeballs. Or my earholes. Or my crystal ball. But what else can I go on besides my good hunches? He hasn't been an all-star for most of the last four seasons. That's a long time. And while it's probable that a good deal of Wright's diminished productivity might be attributed to the moronic cavern of a playing field that the moronic owners initially installed, Wright's had some serious injuries in the recent past, the kind that could accelerate the winding of his biological baseball clock. And quite frankly, he faded big time in the second half last season. These aren't positive trends. By the way, I truly hope that I'm dead wrong on this call. Vic Sage wrote: While obviously anybody can go south at any point, he's as likely to be sufficiently productive for at least the next 5 years as he is 2. Maybe. But you don't know this for sure. This sounds like it could've come from your rectal orifice. Vic Sage wrote: And the "Dickey fiasco"? Puleez. They sold high on a guy they picked up off the scrap heap, trading from their only position of strength and depth to get key pieces that will accelerate the rebuild. The Mets did very well for themselves once they declined to resign Dickey. Still, the development of baseball prospects is always a tenuous business. You know this. If the Mets aren't in a financial crisis, Dickey never gets dealt. Dickey was extremely reasonable in his contract demands and gave the Mets more of a hometown discount than Wright did. And while many point to Dickey's age as a sign that he might have little left in the tank, I'm skeptical, while still recognizing the possibility of a big and near term Dickey fade. When Dickey takes the mound for the Blue Jays in 2013, whether at the beginning or end of the season, he'll never be more than 12 months removed from his Cy Young Award season. So how much diminishment should one expect? He doesn't appear to be a flukish one-year wonder, but rather a pitcher that's reinvented not only himself, but the knuckleball he relies on, throwing the pitch with an accuracy and at a velocity never before matched by anybody in the history of the game. We've seen Cy Young award winners bomb out almost immediately after their award winning season. Vuckovich and Steve Stone come to mind right away. I don't see Dickey as a fluke. He was excellent from the moment he arrived here, and only got better. By the by, that the Mets picked up Dickey off of the scrap heap is irrelevant at this point.

batmagadanleadoff Feb 15 2013 11:50 AM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

Plus, you know (gag me with a spoon), Wright ain't no Derek Jeter.

Gwreck Feb 25 2013 05:31 PM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

Want to hear about the Mets finances from someone other than Howard Megdal? No problem, the Post has you covered. The team is expecting to lose more than $10 million this year, after bleeding red the past two seasons, while attendance is projected to fall for a fifth straight year, The Post has learned. Also, I found this note interesting: However, the Mets have paid only some of the $320 million in principal due lenders in 2014, making next year’s talks potentially tense if the Mets do not hit their own not-so-rosy projections, the source said. The Mets declined to comment.

batmagadanleadoff Feb 25 2013 05:54 PM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

Ponzi schemes. Casinos. And more ponzi schemes. Any day now, they'll send Jeff Wilpon south of the border to strike a deal with the crack cocaine cartels.

Ashie62 Feb 25 2013 07:50 PM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

Does anyone in the cartel play the OF?

Ceetar Feb 25 2013 09:12 PM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

People actually care which businesses the Mets do business with? Could probably dig up 'dirt' on half, if not more, of the companies on any given team's list of sponsors. As long as the money is green..

MFS62 Feb 25 2013 09:42 PM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Any day now, they'll send Jeff Wilpon south of the border to strike a deal . I can see the news story now: "As part of a continuing efort to improve the pitching staff, the New York Mets have announced the signing of ex-major league pitcher Fernando Valenzuela and invited him to their major league Spring Training camp in Port St. Lucie." Later

Edgy MD Feb 26 2013 07:20 AM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

Gwreck wrote: Want to hear about the Mets finances from someone other than Howard Megdal? No problem, the Post has you covered. The team is expecting to lose more than $10 million this year, after bleeding red the past two seasons, while attendance is projected to fall for a fifth straight year, The Post has learned. Yeah, those are the team's own projections.

Ashie62 Mar 27 2013 11:00 AM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

Don't know how Forbes does this but the Mets clock in 6th in value ay 811 Million with a 2012 Operating loss of 2.4 Million, a mere bag of shells [url]http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/mets/post/_/id/63054/forbes-mets-value-811m

Lefty Specialist Mar 28 2013 11:36 AM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

The problem with the rear-view mirror is that objects are always larger than they appear.

Edgy MD Mar 28 2013 11:38 AM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

And the problem with bats out of Hell is that they're always gone by the morning sun.

Vic Sage Mar 28 2013 02:09 PM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

And the problem with the future is that it ain't what it used to be.

Ceetar Mar 28 2013 02:19 PM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

Ashie62 wrote: Don't know how Forbes does this but the Mets clock in 6th in value ay 811 Million with a 2012 Operating loss of 2.4 Million, a mere bag of shells [url]http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/mets/post/_/id/63054/forbes-mets-value-811m What happened to 'projected loss of $70 million"? hell, wasn't that the amount budgeted for? It's all just creative accounting..

Edgy MD Mar 28 2013 02:23 PM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

Where's the $70 million figure coming from?

Ceetar Mar 28 2013 02:37 PM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

Edgy MD wrote: Where's the $70 million figure coming from? I know I remember hearing something last year about the projected losses for 2012, I think it was $70 million.. I'll try to google for it later see if I can dig it up if no one else happens to remember. I've always been skeptical of these numbers and I always wonder what it does or doesn't include. My guesses were always that that big loss number was strictly Mets revenue against Mets payroll, not taking into account things like SNY and naming rights and maybe not even MLB licensing payouts, but I wish it was spelled out somewhere.

Edgy MD Mar 28 2013 09:24 PM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

The word "projected" had me thinking we were talking about the coming season.

Frayed Knot Mar 28 2013 09:34 PM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

$70 million as an operating loss was definitely cited quite possibly for the 2011 season IIRC -- a number which seemed overly large to me in that if you could lose that much in one year turning a profit in any year seemed almost impossible otherwise. IOW, who knows the accuracy of the source of these types of reports.

Zvon Mar 31 2013 09:55 PM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

Read this in the paper today and consider it the best article written about our guys this off season. Mets must be smarter once they start spending [url]http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/mets/mets_must_be_smarter_once_they_start_UqaVxMfedx29ZvNer68RWL

Edgy MD Mar 31 2013 10:07 PM Re: Fred Says Money Will Be Available

“The big thing for me is it feels like the Mets are stuck in some kind of purgatory,” an official from another NL team said recently, on the condition of anonymity. “They didn’t blow up their club like Houston did, but they also aren’t a serious threat in the NL East behind Washington, Atlanta, and even Philadelphia. Filed before the Santana injury was known to be a KO, but Baseball Prospectus called the division suchly. Washington: 86-76 / -- Atlanta: 83-79 / 3 GB New York: 82-80 / 4 GB Philadelphia: 81-81 / 5 GB Miami: 69-93 / 17 GB I guess that BP's predictions work from a mean of many outcomes and so they usually include divisions bunched tighter than they will end up after the one outcome that is a real-life season. But it suggests that, while the Mets are in purgatory, they are neither stuck there nor doomed to an uninteresting season. (Unless Duda stinks it up some more. Then all bets are off.)