- Thread starter
- #1
McCourt paid $430 million in 2004 to buy the team, Dodger Stadium and 250 acres of land that include the parking lots, from the Fox division of Rupert Murdoch's News Corp., a sale that left the team with about $50 million in cash at the time. The team's debt stood at $579 million as of January, according to a court filing, so McCourt stands to make hundreds of millions of dollars even after a $131 million divorce payment to former wife Jamie, taxes and legal and banking fees.
"The problem with this strategy is that the more paid upfront by the broadcast deal, the less money is available for team operations. The more debt they take on, the more debt service is required, the less money that's available for team operations. With the only beneficiary being the man walking out the door. A challenging result that baseball tried to avoid."
The three worst parts about the deal are as follows:
1. The new Warriors owner is part of the group buying the Bums. So now my favorite basketball team owns my least favorite sports franchise of all time. It stings.
2. McCourt somehow gets to keep half the parking lot land and will continue to make money off the Dodgers even after he boned Magic Johnson's group out of $2 billion. Maybe I'm missing something, but that just strikes me as a really fucking stupid thing to do.
3. Stan Kasten will end up running the Bums, which means that Secret Agent Ned is likely out of a job.
A thought occurs to me ... apparently the Dodgers are worth more than the Yankees? (Forbes valuation was around $1.7B recently.)
WTF? What I'm most pissed off about is that McCourt sucked money out of the franchise, was running it into the ground, and in a snap he is able to turn around and make a huge profit from it? AND the team is likely to boost it's salary in the near future?
It's now official - I hate Magic Johnson.
McCourt must be very lucky, or he has an ability to recognize assets about to see a dramatic increase in price.
One gets the feeling that if all this money is going into the Dodgers, then we will soon look at Zito's contract as a minimum wage deal. "Cole Hamels for 6 years and $200 million, please, Alex."
Talk about an arms race.
I live down in LA and all the sports radio so far..... the word is that they will be major players in free agency from the jump and will add players this year via trades. They are already talking about Hamels and even the next year Votto. They are trying to make them "Yankees West."
The thing I thought was funny is how Magic is saying he is gonna be on the phone calling guys the second free agency starts. I know he is a beloved guy here, but what the hell does he know about baseball?? Why is he the one recruiting the players?? And everyone here seems to be thinking that that is the big selling point for the players to come over here, but that sounds like homers talking to me.
The scary thing is though, that they are about to get a huge TV deal.
I know the Dodgers are a trophy franchise within MLB, maybe only superceded by the Red Sox, Yankees, and Cubs, but doesn't this bump up the value of all of the teams?
The arms race works that way too...don't the Giants owners think "hey the Giants are only a half step 'less trophy', doesn't that make us worth $1.5 bil? And maybe we can spend a little more now because a. we have to and b. we get more back on the back end?"
I know the Dodgers are a trophy franchise within MLB, maybe only superceded by the Red Sox, Yankees, and Cubs, but doesn't this bump up the value of all of the teams?
The arms race works that way too...don't the Giants owners think "hey the Giants are only a half step 'less trophy', doesn't that make us worth $1.5 bil? And maybe we can spend a little more now because a. we have to and b. we get more back on the back end?"
It should assuming the new LA owners are rational, and the Dodgers aren't viewed as a unique consumption item. If the price is based upon an estimate of the positive cash flow the Dodgers will generate (which i think is an an accurate assumption), then, while there are probably some unique branding that won't carry over to other team's, it should bump up most of teams valuation.
Bottom line, it's really just a recognition of the cash flow potential coming from regional sports networks. We''ve already seen that in Texas - something I mention here
A. is a valid point.
However, B. does not hold any water. Look what McCourt did, and he still won the lottery. Look at what the Warriors and Clippers owners have done, and they are still swimming in it.