6:01pm: Jesse Rogers of ESPN.com has more details on MLB’s proposed cuts, tweeting that a player on a $35MM salary would make roughly $7.8MM, someone at $10MM would earn in the $2.9MM vicinity and a $1MM player would pull in $434K. ESPN’s Jeff Passan has further info here.
5:00pm: “We made a proposal to the union that is completely consistent with the economic realities facing our sport. We look forward to a responsive proposal from the MLBPA,” MLB spokesman Pat Courtney stated (via Jon Heyman of MLB Network, on Twitter).
3:39pm: The MLBPA’s “very disappointed” with MLB’s proposal, Evan Drellich and Ken Rosenthal of The Athletic report (on Twitter). While the league offered to share more playoff revenue, the players still don’t feel as if they’d do well in this situation. They believe they’d still have to make “massive” additional cuts, Drellich tweets. Bill Shaikin of the Los Angeles Times (Twitter link) adds that the two sides are also far apart on health and safety issues. The union higher-ups will hold further discussions with the players before deciding whether to continue with negotiations, according to Joel Sherman of the New York Post (via Twitter).
1:58pm: Major League Baseball owners have agreed to a revised economic plan for a shortened 2020 season and will present the proposal to the MLB Players Association today. Per USA Today’s Bob Nightengale, owners have scrapped the idea of a 50-50 revenue split and will instead suggest a sliding scale of pay reductions for players. Those with the largest guaranteed salaries would surrender the largest percentage of their salaries, while players with the smallest salaries would earn “most” of their guaranteed money, Nightengale adds.
Any league proposal figures to be met with some pushback from the players’ side. It’s hard to imagine that ownership will simply structure a reduction scale in such a fashion that players immediately accept. It’s notable in light of the early report on the proposal, too, that what constitutes “most” of a lesser-compensated player’s salary seems likely to be defined differently by owners and players.
Players, according to Travis Sawchick of FiveThirtyEight (Twitter links), have been amenable to the expanded 14-team postseason structure and are open to playing more games than in the floated 82-game schedule — both of which would create additional revenue for all parties. ESPN’s Jeff Passan suggested this morning that the MLBPA’s counter-proposal could indeed push for more than 82 games (Twitter link, with video). Deferred payments on 2020 salaries have been an oft-speculated point of compromise as well. Ownership is already deferring payouts of the signing bonuses in this year’s shortened MLB Draft.
It’s in everyone’s best interest to come to terms both on financials and health/safety guidelines as quickly as possible. The league’s longstanding hope has been for a mid-June reboot of training camps and an early-July start to the season — presumably over Independence Day weekend.
Had the initial March agreement between the two sides held up, that might well be more plausible, but that document confoundingly neglected to address what would happen should games be played in the absence of fans (or at least to address it in precise terms). As such, the MLBPA has been waiting on today’s forthcoming economic proposal for several weeks. The initial plan, the aforementioned revenue split, was rejected outright by MLBPA chief Tony Clark before the league could even formally present it.
Keyword – GUARANTEED. The Players have already given up a lot of money and there is no reason to give up one cent more.
You see? That’s why this stuff is hard to discuss. Players have given up nothing at this point. The season was suspended and they thus haven’t played. In fact, players already received $170 million that they keep whether a game is played or not.
The owners on the other hand, have tons of continuing obligations (including the $170M).
Oh those poor, poor owners. I can see them now, standing in soup lines. Get me a bucket so I can fill it with tears.
No, they won’t necessarily be ruined by this, but they lose much less with no season than a season and prorated salaries
The top 1% vs the top .1%.
Um, if the players received no money at all this year, they wouldn’t be in soup lines either. I just don’t understand why people talk about players as if they are living in the ghetto. Aside from the 22-25 year old players or the cup of coffee guys, almost all players are millionaires. This is not a case of Ebenezer Scrooge and Bob Crachet.
The players who are really hurt are the ones who already know they won’t have a season – minor leaguers.
And yet the union argues for… the, wait for it, major leaguers who are almost all wealthier from 10 years work than about 90% of minor leaguers
Owners represent all the baseball operations and support staff that make a game happen. Players don’t pay the salaries of the training staff, ticket booth attendees, or stadium security. All good jobs. All a part of one symbiotic system. 50/50 was a decent deal. This sliding scale is a better deal. How much more do the players want? Full prorated salaries when the whole industry is going to lose a ton of revenue! Ha ha!
I wish the thumbs down still existed.
You expect a rational thought process from the majority of posters here? This has gotten worse than reddit.
Minor league players are not members of the MLPA. Of course, they are going to argue for major leaguers. They union represents them, not minor leaguers
That is not true. The owners have $5.25 billion in revenue that continues whether there is a game or not. They get additional revenue from sponsorships and local broadcast that they would lose by not having a season at all They lose only $4 billion in localized revenue (ticket sales, concessions, parking) from not having fans in the stands.
They are asking the players to take 54% to 76% cut in pay to play a half season.
They are billionaires, they can afford it. They are still getting paid their TV money, likely for part of their advertising money. They still got lots of fans cash from ticket sales & online stuff.. MLBTV still has my 121 bucks despite not giving me any content or a whiff of a refund or explanation of future plans.
Businessmen has long careers players short careers. My support is with the players.
Why would you pay an employee full price for half the work and a 1/4 of the revenue?
No fans = no food, alcohol, merch sales, tickets, and anything else
Tv, sure some teams make more then others for tv revenue but just like anything else it’s a business. No profits no pay
Just cancel the season
This is inaccurate. They’re not asking for full price for half work. The players have already agreed to a prorated salary. If they play 50%, they get 50%. If they play 30%, they get 30%. The owners signed the agreement. It was obvious back in March that there would be at least some games would have limited attendance. The owners should have included a clause stating the agreement could be revisited if reduced attendance would be an issue. They didn’t. Your next point makes sense in a vacuum where no season this year has zero impact on profits next year. Even if teams lose money this year, they stand to to lose more in future seasons by alienating fans by not having a season this year. They’re better off with a comparatively small loss this year.
Re: MLB.tv — that’s your fault for not calling up their customer service like I did in mid-May after no update and they couldn’t have been nicer about a refund. Nice lady also was a Pirates fan and I tried to cheer her up. You still should be able to despite the time passage.
If they can’t provide a service, you have no obligation to pay for it. How easy they make to get that refund is really up to the business, though MLB.tv remained fairly transparent during a weird time.
I always pay for MLB.tv with Paypal, because, whether there is no service or service was poor, I always got my refund.
And how do u figure 1/4 revenue. Alot of teams didnt give refunds, they gave future credits. They still have their tv money, which is probably 2nd biggest source of revenue. Yes they’ll lose merchandise sales at games, but I’m sure they still have merchandise money coming in for mlb licensed stuff sold at walmart, academy, dicks, etc. And obviously they wont have concession sales, but they also wont have to play for the electricity and other costs of preparing those concessions or employees to sell them. And I still stand behind the position that if ur not gonna share revenue when game is profitable, then players dont owe you to offset ur losses, that’s all part of the risk/reward system of being owner.
Well you should have asked for a refund for the MLBtv a long time ago. They approved mine within 2 days
I think cancellation of the season makes the most sense. The MLBPA can ensure that it is not outflanked by the player agents, which is what seems to be driving its actions, and the players can lose money and service as a result. If 2021 is canceled, you can be sure there won’t be any $170 million payment or service credit to the players.
Teams or businesses base salaries to be paid out off of projected revenues. Obviously this year is different. And if there is only 50% of the season the revenues are much different with fans in seats versus empty stadiums. While I believe players should fight for as much as they can get I don’t think it’s fair to ask the owners to lose money in the process. It does not matter if it’s a small business or a 10 billion dollar corporation. I think there is a fair compromise somewhere here for all involved.
?? Except that’s exactly what they did… There is a clause that says if games are to be played without fans both sides would return to the table in good faith.
Then you’re stupid. That’s not how a successful business operates. You can support the players and still understand the real world.
They didn’t agree to it, that’s why this discussion is even taking place.
Huh? The clause is in the agreement from march. The owners want to talk, players don’t. That seems clear, what are u arguing?
I totally agree with you but, the owners did include a weasel clause such as you describe. The players said, fine include the clause but we aren’t actually going to renegotiate, and I doubt they will. This is going to end, if it ends, with the players taking the cuts the owners want only as deferrals. But I think the owners may actually be fine with not playing because what they really care about is being able to lord about at the stadium with their millionaire friends. No fans also means no one in the executive suite means the fun toy is broken for now. I predict the owners try to just use COVId to break the players union. Here’s hoping the players make a good plan to launch their own league when the 2021 lockout comes, even if they have to go offshore to do so.
Alienated fans will still show up sooner than later… I hear your sentiment but most people too addicted to sports to boycott, unless they are fans of a bad team.
I don’t usually take sides but the owners usually make a ton of money, and can afford to make a better offer than this. I know people post about how they think the players are overpaid, but the owners make enormously more. The players have to be willing to get less than they were expecting, but the owners need to make a better offer than this as well.
But there will be food alcohol fan merch sales and ticket sales. The point of these negotiations is to play baseball again. That that includes fans in the stadium
Of course the ownwrs are greedy dill holes. And want to cut more than 75% of players salaries.
Because you have a contract
Yeah it is not a simple topic as some would like to believe. Regardless of what side somebody takes, if they were an owner, they would think like an owner and with owners best interests in mind… likewise if they were a player they would think like a player with players best interests in mind.
Both sides have to be willing to compromise. A “not going to budge” attitude does not contribute to a solution. If the owners were offering 50/50 revenue split and players wanted 1/2 season prorated salary, meeting somewhere in the middle like 1/4 season prorated salary plus 50/50 revenue split on half the revenue (1/4 revenue) might not be unreasonable for either side. Will look pretty bad if they can’t get something done, especially if either side appears to be unreasonable and not willing to compromise.
We will see soon I guess… I think too much to lose for both sides not to get something done, but what do I know. Big egos can make stupid decisions and communication impossible.
Exactly, homeslice. And not even all owners are the same. The Yankees have enough TV money and backing to better absorb salary obligations than say the Brewers. Not all TV money is equal, as we all know.
There’s no perfect solution here but hopefully cooler, calmer heads can find one that works for the majority of those involved.
The real barrier to coming to a compromise isn’t money, or at least not specifically how the revenue is split from this season. The real barrier is ownership wants the players to trust them on the revenue numbers. Good luck with that. Ownership makes sure that player salaries are public information, but the revenues and profits they make are kept a deep, dark secret, even from the employees. Especially from them. This is the cushy deal MLB ownership has always enjoyed, and this is the way they want it to stay. They are going to resist drawing back the veil now, and forever, especially now when the CBA is coming up for renewal. If ownership and the union fail to come to a settlement, this will be the main reason why.
As I state below, transparency is the only way this works. I’m in a revenue split business and we all see the total take on each contract. There’s no surprise, no room to complain. As much as I love my partners, there’s no way I’d take their word for it.
Exactly. Owners want a revenue split, but want players to take their word on how much revenue there is. Uh no. If ur profit sharing then everybody involved gets to see the numbers… mob, owners, players, agents, and reps for owners and players
As Ive stated many times before the players salaries should not be given out unless they want to give it out themselves-
Theres really no reason for us to know and only creates greater obstacles to us enjoying the game on the field
Think of a world where we could just enjoy Albert Pujols instead of thinking what an anchor he is on Trout every time we see him dig in….Not fair/Not cool/ and really none of Our damn Business
How would you feel if your salary was posted on the front of your cubicle at work for everyone to analyze and pick apart every day?
The owners could agree to really share revenue. Pigs could fly.
Exactly, Sandman
That was a really stupid comment Sandman. The players were guaranteed to be paid 100% of their contracts regardless of the length of the season or if fans were in the stands or not. If NO games were played, their contracts were guaranteed. They chose to allow MLB to pay them for just the number of games played. That is more than $1 billion (according to MLB when tey announced the deal in March) that players already have sacrificed so that there would be some kind of a baseball season. They gave up that billion plus dollars in return for MLB owners giving them a pittance of $170 million for April and May. .
I’m all for the players getting their money but they signed an agreement to revisit the payment structure if games had to be played without fans. That doesn’t mean they have to take a bad deal but they do have to negotiate in good faith
Negotiating in good faith… doesn’t that require two parties?
What makes you think both parties are not negotiating in good faith? Have you seen the proposals from each side?
@whynot. Already explained.
The owners’ proposal is a joke, and it’s not even a funny one.
To this point there are no proposals from the players other than to pretend there is no pandemic. They propose to have a full draft for signees who won’t play in the minors this year or possibly next. And then pretend that the salary arrangements for fanless games will be the same as if there were fans. Both proposals completely stupid and unreasonable.
The problem for baseball is the dual structure of representation. Players have a union and individual agents who are always trying to advertise how hard line they are. The MLPBA gets sucked into not being outflanked by player agents who have nothing at all at stake.
I think no baseball for a couple of years might be a good idea.
This whole conversation is a joke. As if any of you know what the numbers are going to be or how much the teams can stand to lose.
The worst part is it wont be spread out evenly –
I think this is death for small market teams
In the end Lad NYY Bos probably capitalize on this as they wil be the only ones who can pay the higher salaries-
What a mess
No baseball for a couple of years would kill MLB as a major American sport, but that’s what this league deserves at this point.
I’m 35 years old, and have spent my entire life watching the owners and players union, through adversarial negotiations and bad faith tactics, destroy the greatest game on earth. Both sides are driven exclusively by greed, and neither deserve the support some fans give them. They don’t give a damn about us, and that’s clear every time they get together to negotiate anything.
Spot on Daniel. I’ve got a decade on you, and couldn’t agree more. Incredible game between the lines. But the nonsense drama that takes place is absurd.
And they’re trying to negotiate. They said we do not feel we have to take another cut from what we’ve already agreed on, SHOW US YOUR FINANCIALS/BOOKS to justify a new agreement. The owners will not do it. So why do you feel they have to take a cut without any justification? It was discussed during their initial agreement that there was a high likelihood that they would have to play without fans. Now the owners are crying poor. Yet no circumstances have changed from the initial agreement. The owners need to either open up their books to justify a new negotiation and prove to the players that they’d be losing money, or continue with their initial agreed upon prorated salaries.
How many businesses open their financials to their employees? None! The players are a bunch of Prima Donnas! Cancel the season.
@rangerslegend
The fact that people are not allowed at the games alone proves money will be lost.
The agreement that was already made was likely based on the fact fans would still be able to attend games…Now they cant so logically Yes a new deal should be made.
Wrong. U can look up revenue of almost any billion dollar business. What exactly do u think Forbes and wall street journal bases their fortune 500 and top companies to work for, etc on?
U can not. For non-public companies Forbes can only estimate, and Wall Street is decidedly not involved.
Most businesses typically don’t pay on a split revenue proposal. Would you take a job offering you a 50/50 split if they weren’t willing to show you their books? If your check comes in, and it’s only $100.00, what’s your argument going to be?
And there ARE Forbes valuations for baseball teams!
Wrong. Businesses have to disclose when they claim in negotiations that they can’t afford what a union is asking for — and this goes double of course when they’re asking a union to give concessions on what’s already been agreed! The owners avoided this in other negotiations by highlighting not the amount but the form of the deal. What’s really going on here is most of the owners are based in right to work states or are rabid anti-union activists — they hate having to negotiate with a union at all and want to break it. littler.com/publication-press/publication/dc-circu…
Notably those are publicly held companies, though. Incredibly, MLB owners have been given a monopoly by Federal law even though their businesses are privately held !!! The whole structure is a massive scandal and if this brings it crashing down it will be worth missing out on a few seasons.
They can only estimate their value because they are privately held. Which is or should be a huge scandal given that they are allowed to have monopolies and reap huge subsidies. Public ally held companies have to disclose their financials to investors.
The reason; Major League Baseball has yet to play a single game. So you’re bad at math and logic. Might want to sit this one out for a while. Let the adults discuss this.
You just cannot understand the most basic concepts koamalu
Sop they better play or they get nothing more than the token 170 Million one time payment.
“The union higher-ups will hold further discussions with the players before deciding whether to continue with negotiations,”
If the higher up union guys don’t wake up the players are going to lose many many millions of dollars and next year Mookie and those other top free agents are getting half of what they would of got before. And without baseball this year and/or next the majority of players will be working your jobs at walmart and target.
Not guaranteed in time of national emergency
Guaranteed, doesn’t mean you get paid for games that were canceled. You’re moving the goal post.
Owners screwed up by not addressing possibility of games without fans in the March agreement. Why should players take one cent less than what was agreed to in March. Owners need to suck it up; pay the players; and move on. 1/2 season better than no season
Players are screwed, I’m sorry to say. They get 4% of their salaries if there is no season. They could seek maybe 50% via an arbitration award, but I think the “good faith” language would beneif the owners.
The average player plays for 5 years, right? The average owner owns a team for probably a decade or longer. The player’s only leverage is to bring the league to a grinding halt, and then maybe start an alternative league that the superstars couldn’t play in because they are under contract with MLB teams.
Superstars will be able to play once the owners lock out the players for 2021. Individual player contracts are voided if the CBA goes poof
Ah. Good to know.
There are players who want to play….and others holding out for more money……
if you wan to play…..lets get going….
if you want to hold out for more money…….you want more protection………stay home and see you next February !
They are not holding out for MORE money.
They are saying we made an agreement AFTER the owners KNEW there would probably be no games played with fans in the stands and now the owners want to break that agreement.
The billionaire OWNERS are at fault here, not the people on the field. .
Patently untrue, it would seem. If the prorated salaries were based on the contingency of no attendance, then what was the reason for a different clause that expressly addressed the absence of fans?
@sandman12 knows what’s up and it’ll be a huge uphill climb for the players. This agreement pays 65% of the league at least 85% of their salaries. I don’t know the voting process of the MLBPA, but will 16% of the league vote against their self interest in order to get teh superstars $10M more? Won’t the union have to take care of those players if they advise them to shoot down this deal, cutting into the slice of the pie for the superstars? This isn’t like a CBA that will operate for more than one year. This is an agreement to be paid for THIS YEAR, when the alternative for the players looks like 4% of their salaries.
And if the union ratifies the deal because the majority accepts it, are superstars really going to leave their underpaid teammates in the lerch by staying home?
The only thing guaranteed was that this proposal was shrewd AF from MLB.
I’d say players should take something similar (but have the clubs guarantee minor league pay) and strike like crazy in 2022 or whever. Bringing the league to a halt during a pandemic doesn’t do much for them, I don’t think.
The next work stoppage is going to kill baseball, whether it’s now or at the next CBA. And both the owners and the players will deserve what they get when it happens. There’s not a more short-sighted, backwards-thinking league in American professional sports.
Nah the players are going to laugh at this offer. A structure like this would make sense if the dollars players were giving up were being deferred, not lost altogether. If the owners really want games (and I’m not sure they do), deferred compensation is where this is headed.
@Koamalu
I dont think at the time they did know fans wouldn’t be at the games. So yes it should be revisited.
No the agreement was still based on fans being in the stadium at some point or no government ban on large gatherings.
Exactly, same goes for the rest of us, if we’re willing to “risk” our heath and go to a game, let us, if someone doesn’t feel like it, don’t.
Those that go will eventually just pass it on to others that didn’t go.
When YOUR risking your health to go to a game, your actually risking everyone around you’s, health & everyone they are around health..
What is so freaking hard to understand about that?
How would you feel if your actions cost someone their life or one of their loved ones lives? All because your just selfish ASF…
I got guns, they are fun asf to shoot. But I dont risk shooting them any where near other people just because Im bored & want something to do.. Read a book, watch youtube, watch Netflix… There was a time before all these options, consider yourself lucky.
YOU’RE
Agreed, if you want to play then we can have a discussion. If you’re genuinely concerned about getting it than it’s totally alright to not play, but then why interfere with negotiations when you’re not even going to be playing(ie Sean Doolittle);what sort of creature are you that you are afraid of severely harming your loved ones but will do it for enough money?
Hear hear….
This… brings a smile to my face.
The owners knew in March when they signed the agreement that there would likely NOT be any games this season with fans in the stands and they had already proposed several ideas about how that could be accomplished including games in Arizona or Arizona and Florida.
They asked the players to agree to getting paid only for games played in March and the players agreed. Now the owners want the PLAYERS to give up more money so the owners don’t have to give up any.
The owners are not the ones that are putting their health and possibly lives on the line by playing. The players are.
The owners need to pull their heads out.
They can either lose $4 billion by playing games with no fans and paying the players what they agreed to in March AFTER they knew there would probably be no games with fans all season.
OR they can lose 100% of their revenue by scrapping the season.
The players have done their part in this already by conceding billions in salaries from their GUARANTEED contracts. .
If you think the owners aren’t losing anything, frankly, you’re just not very bright.
Ouch!
The owners may lose some money this year, which is the cost of owning a business. Sometimes you profit, sometimes you face losses. The owners will make back whatever they lose this year in a millisecond, regardless. For the good of the sport and for future revenues, the owners need to take the hit on this one.
Agreed 110%.
Owning a baseball team is a hobby for billionaires. Sometimes your hobby costs you money. This is one of those times.
Player contracts are guaranteed. Owner profits aren’t.
That’s coming from someone that things the virus is no biggie
The owners aren’t losing money. They’re losing profits. The difference is substantial.
That’s the risk of doing business, though. They’ve capitalized off a 10 billion dollar industry for years. Now that they’re not going to profit as much, they want the players to take it on the chin.
There’s not enough cheese in the world for their whine.
Again, players have conceded not a dime. If bans are not lifted to allow games, they will get nothing this season. The cancellation clause is in their contract just like the salary for a normal season.
Owners are putting up the financial risk. If the players do not want to play they should speak up, say they will sit out and move on. If they choose not to play they should not be paid. Call it an unpaid leave of absence. Again, let the adults discuss this. Your school-kid arguments need not apply.
The players are risking their health. Perhaps you should let trained medical professionals discuss this, instead of being rude in the comments? Goose. Gander. You know?
You don’t seem to be very good at math:
0>-4000000000,right?
Owners aren’t losing 4 billion. They haven’t lost a cent, aside from the 170 mill they gave.
They won’t earn 4 bill but they haven’t lost 4 bill and won’t lose 4 bill. They’re not making revenue but they’re not eating money, if any, currently.
That being said. Owners have all the leverage. Every owner has 10s possibly 100s of investments for income. Players? Not so much.
So the owners lost $170-mil? That’s more than a cent. Well done on the math there Dogs. Maybe players should find another league to play in where the pay is much better. Wait a sec…
Owners hold most of cards here. Vast majority, if not all of them have other business. 90% of players make nothing to very little outside of salary from the game. Owners can cost losses and cancel the season under the guise of safety, other revenue will keep them afloat until next season. Players already agreed to 1/162 for each game not played. How many of them can go over a year without a paycheck?
“That being said. Owners have all the leverage. Every owner has 10s possibly 100s of investments for income. Players? Not so much.”
So your saying those millionaire players are too dumb to invest their millions and that is the owners fault…. Hardly!!!!! Well I agree with you then the players are pretty dumb! If there is no season I hope alot of those dumb players find employment stocking shelves then!
The vast majority of players don’t make a million. 50% are on league minimum and 65% make one million or less.
They are losing a year of service time for every major league player. That has value and that value is easily in the billions.
The also have other business expenses. Many of those are property loans. How many of them have stadium leases that they have to pay?
What are you saying; the March agreement clearly stated that there is full service time?
The risk for the owners is they start a season, commit to paying salaries, and then a postseason is canceled because of a second wave. If it’s hard for you to understand that the St. Louis owner is not going to make money off Game 50 against the White Sox without fans, then I don’t know what to tell you. Now, is it bush league for a company that has profited greatly for a long time to want to renegotiate wages during a pandemic because their business model is unsustianable for the immediate future? That’s a different argument, but thousands of corporations are doing that around the country right now.
And the agreement was not for fans to be not allowed on its face. If it was, there would be no mention of negotiating in good faith if fans weren’t allowed.
The players are screwed on this one, unfortunately. Their only option is to bring the sport to a grinding halt, but that doesn’t help the majority of them that won’t sign the superstar contract.
Boras is going to flip a lid. All his clients are the highest paid players. Lol. Smart move by the owners to put the pressure on the much smaller amount of big money guys to take larger pay cuts.
Shrewd AF. That’s for sure. 65% of the league takes a 10% or 15% pay cut under this plan. I’m not sure of MLBPA voting procedure, but that means about 16% of the players have to vote against their self interest to turn this down (or the union has to take care of those players, further cutting into the size of the pie for 2020).
I have always felt the fairest solution is for the owners to pay the pro rated portion of the salaries WITHOUT extra playoffs, and to not pay the free agents what Boras expects after the season. Either that or simply cancel the season
How does that account for the 40% loss of revenue due to no fans at games?
MLB gave their word to the players. If they try and change the terms of the agreement the players should just say see you in 2021. I know the owners will lose money but that is the risk of doing business. Nothing is guaranteed
MLB books are closed, so your 40% of revenue figure is pure speculative fantasy. Stop parroting owners BS.
According to statista, back in 2017 30% of league wide revenue was from ticket sales. So 40% in 2020 isn’t that far fetched.
Then, open the books and prove it, owners…
But that would require collusion which, pretty sure, is in fact illegal
MLB is exempt from antitrust law.
It’s almost cute that these fools think there will be a season. Almost, but not really. Give it up already. There is absolutely not going to be a baseball season.
Period.
Darn.. I thought it was going to happen, but your comment change my mind since you have inside info what is going on to say something like that. shucks!
Inside info unfortunately is not even necessary
I agree, completely about money! You would think someone with half a brain inside the baseball world could see that. Pack it in….. even if they play it will be a farce….. not baseball
It amazes me how many people believe the owners as to how much money they will lose. They haven’t shown us any real proof. It’s more a “take our word for it” scenario. They’ve done everything they could over the last few years to repress salaries when the industry was teeming with $$$$. Why should I believe them or take their side now?
Pretty much the players stance here, seeing the revenue split has been pulled off the table already kind of gives you an idea the owners are not willing to be transparent with their books, meaning the losses are not as harsh as they claim.
The Union should not defer one penny, nor have to go through extra playoffs. Owners pay up what they promised or no baseball. Owners lose 4 billion or 8 billion it is up to them.
No baseball is not an option for both sides and they know that. Compromises will be made by both.
IF players don’t work with the owners and the owners then pay full salary then they will just find another way to recoup the money which players could lose long term. It is better that both sides compromise now, and maybe the union will use this as leverage for items in the next CBA.
No baseball is an option. Even the owners admit no players should be forced to play. The players should not have to defer any money. The players would be better off cancelling he season.
No baseball due owners and players cannot agree on money is going to do much more long term damage then the short term hit they will both take., It is in their best interest they both work it out.
No baseball due to money is not really an option unless they are willing to lose a ton fans long term. The hardcore fans will stick around like majority on this board, but the average Joe fans will not come back and they matter.
If this was poker the players have a full house and the owners have a pair of threes. The players should call their bluff. March deal or no deal
IF the owners do cave, then they will just take recoup their cost in other ways, meaning they spend less in free agency and etc..
It is better for both sides to compromise and work out a deal that both feel good about. It just seems short sighted by the union to hold firm to their stance,
Since when were unions strong? The 1970’s and prior?
Better realize half the states are no longer union friendly and even in those other half companies are what make the jobs available in the 1st place, just like more ballplayers will be available should a portion decide not to want the ONLY way they know how to make 1/2m+ without a real job.
Where the do you get that from? Again, something>0?
NY…how is a guy like G Cole better off taking 0 dollars as opposed to say 14 million for half a season?
I understand your hatred of owners, but it’s not as simple as saying “screw you” and getting over on the owners, they would get a year older making nothing
I’d flip that card scenario. The owners typically own teams for decades and can afford one bad year. You’re a 30 year old baseball player with only a couple of seasons left and you miss that prime earning year a lot more.
It would suck not to see Mike Trout but if that also means Arte doesn’t have to pay Pujols and Upton, he’ll live.
The real victims here will be the arbitration guys who are just now about to make life altering money.
interesting take. so you’re an owner. lets take mookie betts since we know he’s a free agent next year.
he decides to sit out this year. next year when he wants to be paid would the owners pay him as much? so, not only did mookie take a hit not playing one year, but then he’d take a hit on his career
and that’s if the owners even want to give him a contract. im pretty sure the owners could end up on top if they wanted to
i guess players could form their own league, though unsure what stadiums they could use. and how much money they’d forego there – if they then had to pay those people somehow. but they’d probably mainly be riding on the coat tails of the fans from the mlb, so still benefiting from what mlb has done in the past
im pretty positive there are decent baseball players that wouldn’t command 40 million dollars per year. and yes, the issue is hard to talk about without going into the granular details.
but d1 college baseball is largely likened to AA milb baseball. i would bet 563k minimum to those d1 players sounds pretty good. or even half of that. or a quarter of that
An d no baseball means no salary for the players also… next year no salary either as the players strike… Yep those players will be working at the Ny walmarts stocking shelves next year too… as they will be broke! Here come the replacement players next year too!!! It has gone on long enough and the players leverage will be in how much they invested if any… and we all know they didn’t.
It’s been tried in the past and lasted for one year before they all just went back to the owners (google players league 1890)
hardline stances like tbat from either side accomplish nothing other than ensure there is no season
It means victory. I would not even ask to see the books. Lose 8 billion or 4 billion it is up to you, we do not care.. I bet the owners cave
Onwers only lose $170M (and whatever salaries they pay their staff) if there is no season at all, unless the players win in front of an arbitrator.
With tax laws always structured to benefit corporations — which is what ball clubs essentially are — the lost revenue will be written off. No owner will “lose” $4bbn or $8bbn, they will simply be able to use those numbers to (on paper) reduce future profits and lower a future tax bill.
Let the whole system crash. There should be no baseball in this climate or environment. When there is a vaccine and widespread available testing in place then resume.
Pax – The facts don’s support the fear. Time to play ball. They need to work out the details and get going.
100k dead disagree
So by that logic, the 80k dead in 2018 from the flu should have caused the country to shut down too?
Bogus.
I’ve never seen a number higher than 68K worldwide for 2018 (feel free to provide a source), and the 100K deaths this year so far are in the USA only.
I’m not arguing that there should not be baseball at some point, but your logic is off. There are 100k dead in spite of shutting down most of the country, if we had not done this then the numbers would be drastically higher. Your average yearly deaths from the flu, which are troubling of course, cannot compare to the damage that this virus has done and can do if things are not handled correctly.
All of these figures come straight from the disinformation factory. Keeping in mind that Twitter found half of the tweets on coronavirus have been made by bots. I suspect the same is true here.
Why do ignorant morons like you continue to regurgitate these numbers and act like youre so smart? You can do math right? You wanna tell me what the proportion of 100,000 is out of 331 million people? Figure it out and tell me of that number calls for a complete lockdown of the country that destroys everyones livelihood and chances of making a living
EBT – Because they live in fear, not facts. Our response was based on grossly inaccurate models, not the facts. This has been driven by two things – fear and agenda. But you can’t debate facts with either because facts get in the way of agenda and people who live in fear can’t focus on the facts because they’re lost in “what ifs”.
Time for baseball.
And once again, it begs the question – any guesstimate as to how many would have died had we NOT taken the precautions we did?
Eh, you’re wasting your time with these illogical, self centered types. It doesn’t compute. They just think they know better than long time, trusted medical experts, or there is some kind of elaborate conspiracy to take away their freedom and hurt their president (at the cost of destroying the economy).
@HubcapDiamondStarHalo and I would question the accuracy of the 100k deaths from COVID.
statnews.com/2018/09/26/cdc-us-flu-deaths-winter/
https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/26/health/flu-deaths-2017–2018-cdc-bn/index.html
80,000 American deaths during that season! By the way that is the last finalized season they have a total on so far as they have to double check their numbers instead of just estimate!
Bogus. The 100k deaths from coronavirus (so far) is the result of the “lock down.” Without the measures taken in the U.S. (which oddly enough were instituted virtually worldwide) the deaths would easily have been hundreds of thousand, and if nothing was done, potentially over a million. So once again, this is how the disinformation factory works. Take total credit for the efforts made to slow the spread and reduce the number of deaths, then claim that those measures were all completely unnecessary.
Hubcap – For 2018, I’ve seen numbers as low as 60k and as high as 80k dead from the flu. That is in the US also, not worldwide. So using your number of 68k dead of the flu in 2018 and using teuf’s logic, what’s your tipping point to close the country? 69k deaths, 70k? The point is it’s all tragic, whether it’s 5k or 100k. Consider why now and not then, or every year for that matter when on average 20k to 40k die of the flu.
Wrong again blue – You can’t prove a negative. There is no testable evidence to show that locking down the country had any affect. As I’ve pointed out before and you choose to ignore, the 7 states that did nothing to lock down had among the lowest deaths per 100k people, the highest of which was 5 deaths per 100k.
Thanks gwell – I didn’t feel like doing the research for them yet again, so thanks for posting that. Why now and not then?
You nailed it. The question is whether baseball will join NASCAR, PGA, NBA and NHL on TV this summer — with NFL returning after Labor Day. There will be sports on TV. An NBA finals matching LeBron’s Lakers with Giannis’ Bucks in prime time this August on TV will draw a bigger audience without the competition of baseball will help the NBA become America’s second biggest sports property. It will be top of mind for the public — even with empty stands.
Remember the line “survival of the fittest?” That meant adapt to the realities.
Cancel baseball for the year, it drops from the public consciousness. The TV audience moves on to the shows they can watch.
During the pandemic, some restaurants adapted to the situation by converting to a takeaway and delivery basis. They found a means to keep bringing in some revenue. They adapted.
Two inflexible sides in baseball, hardening their positions, are helping drive their sport toward irrelevance.
It’s also been pointed out that those 7 states you keep mentioning have mostly rural populations.
No Andy, They all have populated metro areas. New York state also has rural areas. It’s only because of NY City that NY has such a high death rate per 100k people.
You can’t say those states “did nothing to lock down”. They had many restrictions in place. They just didn’t use the term “stay at home”
Governors did what they think was best.
I’m not for the fear and agenda nonsense either. I think a lot of it is ridiculous
Bogus. No negatives need to be proven. It is all very easily comprehended science about contagious disease understood for at least a century, and is accepted by everyone around the world who is not a science denier, or working in the disinformation factory. Another piece of disinformation that you (and the millions of bots) are spreading is the comparison to the flu. The official total for last year (from the CDC) is 60k, and that was considered to be a very bad flu year. Most years it is around half that many. The flu is often deadlier for the people who contract it, but also not nearly as contagious as coronavirus if for no other reason than virtually everyone who gets it knows they have it.
Now, here’s where you and the other science deniers and disinformation workers totally flunk their math exams. The very, very lowest mortality rate estimate I have seen for coronavirus is 0.2%. It sounds like nothing until you apply it to the population. If conservatively only half of the U.S. population contracts it (and this is less than would generally be required to achieve herd immunity), then over 300k die, and this is with rounding down at every opportunity. And if the rate of infection reaches the levels required for half the population to contract the virus, then the healthcare system will be overwhelmed treating sick people and the mortality rate will increase, substantially. A half a million deaths is not an unreasonable projection in that case. Would that still be okie-dokie in your world?
Blue – “mortality rate estimate”
You base everything on estimates and models which have been grossly inaccurate during this entire exercise. It’s that garbage science driven by agendas that has fed the fear. As I have said many times, it is okay that we disagree on how we interpret the data. I respect that you have an opinion that’s different than mine.
Bogus. This is not about different interpretations, it is about science vs. disinformation. I swear, some people are living in the freaking Middle Ages.
Blue – your intolerance to differing opinions is what is “bogus”. You can’t wrap your head around the knowledge that someone disagrees with you. I’m not trying to convince you that I’m right and your wrong. Just expressing my opinion based on the data as I see it. Cheers.
Just my gut, but it seems like we might be a long way off from a resolution and here it is, already May 26. By now you’d hope they’d be 2 weeks deep into negotiations, not just tendering initial proposals. I
As with all things, what’s reported is what they want the public to know. I’m sure there is a lot of progress being made behind the scenes. No baseball isn’t good for anyone.
No baseball works for the players. Why? The Collective Bargaining Agreement ( CBA), is coming up. If the players show they will not give in, they will force the owners to come to a a CBA that benefits the players instead of the owners, or certain owners can go bankrupt. The choice is theirs. ps. If the players take the attitude we do not care to see your books because we do not care if you make $1,000,000,000 or lose $1,000,000,000 that is your concern not ours. The players win.
So if the owners don’t make any money this year or next, they will want to give the players more in 2022?
It’s all about leverage. The owners have been shrinking the player’s money the last 4 years while league revenue has increased dramatically. There is a need in market correction. This fight was coming regardless of the virus. The virus has just expedited the fight.
And when the owners lock them out next year with no pay for two years the players are broke… Or are going to give them your salary to help them survive?.
This statement is funny considering every time the players union “higher ups” whine about opening up the owners books and the leftist media buys that crap as known there is NO proof as they don’t really have access to owners books!!!!! can’t have it both ways but the media doesn’t care to report that. How does anyone know what money the owners spend to get that profit margin to 50% or higher as claimed by the MLBPU. No one knows for sure if they owners even have a 20% profit margin or not!
Well, they could answer those questions pretty easily by opening the books…
I think players getting a season going this year helps them under next CBA, really. If there’s no season, the sport essentially dies. But if there is baseball (and the pandemic subsides), revenues are back up in 2021 and the players have a good bargaining position for 2022.
That’s a whole bunch of very large ifs…
Golf and hockey can take over until football starts.
So essentially the owners are proposing that the games’ stars subsidize the league? Wow.
Yes, if that’s how you want to spin it. You could also say that they’re making sure that the least paid players, who are the ones who actually need money, are going to get it.
Lol I’m not spinning it. What you just said is exactly what subsidizing means…
The owners have privatized the profits since the beginning (last year they received 60% of the revenue–which was a record high revenue–while the players received 40% and had the salaries again reduced–average salaries) and yet now when the owners aren’t going to make nearly as much money, they want to “split the revenue.” They’re trying to socialize the losses. Privatizing profits and socializes losses is beyond dumb in my opinion, because the players ARE THE PRODUCT. Without them, there is no game. Baseball can survive without owners.
So you prove they received 60% and I don’t mean with some media report that is bias!!!
Don’t they benefit the most?
This is a mess and one under a tight deadline. I completely get the owners side. Why play and lose a ton when you can not play and lose a little? That said I also understand the players side, why revenue split when times are bad but not when they are booming?
Ultimately this is pushing the major obstacle to enacting a new CBA up a year and a half and giving it no time to play out.
The ONLY, and I mean ONYLY way this has any shot is if there’s transparency by the owners and a willing attitude from the players.
Which side loses the most if there is no baseball?
MLB players earned more than $4MM on average in 2017, with some players’ salaries exceeding $30MM.
If everything is cut in half (plus a little) for 82 games, the players average $2MM
Many people feel that baseball players and other athletes are overpaid, with the median American full-time worker earning around $45K per year.
No play no pay — does the average player want $2MM or nothing?
However, why would teams play if they lose hundreds of thousands per game without the gate and concessions.
Except the teams with the best TV contracts (they all get about $120MM in a normal season because of the large market-small market sharing), the teams want to make money and the fans should want them to make money.
People spend more if they make more, go out to dinner more, buy better cars.
Do you fans who hate the owners want them not to try to get good free agents because they don’t have the money?
If you hate YOUR OWNER, then it’s time to change your loyalty. Most people don’t work where they hate their manager.
Players will make more money when owners make more money.
It is not about hating your owner ( unless you are the Pirates or Orioles). It is about the owners failing to keep their word from March . Since they cannot be trusted, one solution is to shut the game down until they prove that they can be trusted. I guarantee a full year with no income and paying a mortgage ( like $75m on Yankee Stadium) and limited fan support in 2021 sends a message loud and vlear
The owners have kept their word from March they gave those in need 170M for no work… they are going to give them their service time unless the players void the deal by breaking it.
Congrats. This is the sheepest response I’ve ever seen on one of these blogs. “MY OWNER CAN BANG MY WIFE AND STAB MY DOG THEY MY OWNER SO I LOVE AND OBEY” Geezus. At least get informed. And try to wrap it up, so many words to say not much at all
It’s not like both sides didn’t know the situation almost 3 months ago. Why wait until the last minute to try to get an agreement in place. I can see both sides, BUT, in the end it is the grand ole game that is going to suffer the most. I’m not sure how many “ young” fans the game attracts now, but it will probably be a lot less after this.
Both sides are frustrating in this. These two sides have a history of not giving an inch to each other. This is the kind of relationship the owners and the MLBPA have built for several decades. It shouldn’t be a surprise at all that the MLBPA doesn’t want to give up anything to them.
I understand the idea of a sliding scale, but it’s unfair to the Trouts and Coles of the MLB. Why should they get a 70% cut (just throwing out a number) while a rookie gets only a 30% cut? Because they can afford it? Plus, even though most players make less than $3M/yr, the average is around $4.4M, so owners can pay less overall by hosing the stars with a sliding scale.
It’s mind-numbing to me to think how their initial agreement to play didn’t hammer out salaries if the season had to be played, in full or in part, in front of no fans. Both sides are to blame for that immense oversight. I think the owners need to decide whether they lose less money paying the pro-rata salaries for a half season or canceling it altogether.
That is my stance. The owners did not have to agree to what they did in March., since they did they need to live up to n it or cancel the season
Right there with you on the March agreement. The likelihood of empty stadiums was well known back then and there could have been 2 months of negotiations on that issue.
It doesn’t matter which side of the argument you’re on, traditionally, if the Players’ Union and MLB owners can’t agree on something, it’s us – the fans – that get screwed! Just get it together, will ya?
Love your comment. Enough fans don’t consider that there is a third group in this battle between Owners and Players; the fans. The money they are fighting over is whatever the fans put into it. We have the most important contribution, collectively.
There is a fourth group small business owners near ballparks and vendors. Those are the real losers.
Korean baseball is already playing. Baseball in Japan is about to start. And rumors are that the NBA will be back in action soon. So if fans see that Korea and Japan can play baseball with no health issues, and the NBA…. a close contact sport… can play games in the USA, then fans will know this is strictly about the mone.y And if players and owners can’t come to terms over money, then strike or lock out next season when there is likely a vaccine…. good luck on getting fans back.
Quick, everyone blame labor because for no apparent reason people think owners are their friends
Stop writing articles with the word “too” randomly placed within them. So awkward to read.
Stfu
Clever idea, pit the wealthier players against the ones under younger and less well-paid ones. Good PR as well, since they know fans resent the higher. But it’s inherently unstable. And, to a certain extent, bizarre. With the exception of the youngest stars, fans come out to see stars, the highest earners. Not a serious proposal. Why not just come back with an additional cut in pay. and let the the player say yes or no?
The statement, “far apart on health issues,” would concern me most of all if I was a player.
Even if MLB opened their gates I am sure attendance would be off 50% per game due to fear/economics.
I don’t really care at this point. If they choose not to play I am done with the sport forever (old geezer with cancer so probably no loss)
Players should just play games on their own and stream it. People would pay. Babe used to barnstorm with other players in offseason.
I’m very confused about why revenue sharing should be in effect for 2020, but not for future years…2020 happens to be the only bad year for the MLB, in the last 25.
If the owners want to share the risks, they should also share the benefits. If they want revenue sharing for 2020, then the same revenue sharing should stay in effect indefinitely. You want players to take 50% of revenues in a bad year? Give them 50% of the revenues every year. I bet they’ll say yes to that.
Im a baseball fan above all other sports but if they do not play this year I will be very disenchanted. The owners new proposal seems worse than the initial proposal. But, Im still hoping they hammer out a deal!
The economic reality is irrelevant to the players.
There are less than 15M people in America 65-69, 13M 70-75, 12M 75-84, & 6M 85+
The vast majority of COVID-19 deaths are the 85+ age group. Persons under 65 are more likely to get hit by a car crossing the street than dying of COVID-19. For every age group 10 yrs below 65, the odds drop exponentially to where persons under 35 are more likely to die during a storm than from COVID-19.
Last I looked all MLB players are under 65 so the MLBPA will look extremely dumb not to a ink a deal in time for a July 1st start. Players, coaches, & other personnel who are in a high risk group because of other conditions pertaining to their health
can’t participate this season. That’s simple enough.
The sooner those people are made to accept this reality the sooner teams can fill those positions with low risk persons. That’s how business is run.
Ink the deal & play ball. ST games should start in a couple of weeks.
Those who wish to live in fear & ignore the reality of the odds don’t need to participate. That includes personnel & fans. There is no crying in baseball.
Cry at home. Let the rest of us enjoy the game that many of us once played competitively as kids. Where I live people under 65 don’t fear COVID-19. They shop
& ride bikes without masks & don’t even consider 6 ft of distance.
Csoxjuan I agree with your sentiment. Some people are frothing at the mouth to rip people apart for wanting to live their lives, calling them selfish, and not answering the question as to how long they can be expected to live this way, or asking what life is worth to many people right now.
I don’t want to get or spread it, but I don’t think everybody can be expected to stop living their lives for the next year or two when the survival rate is extremely high, especially if you exclude the sick and elderly. The world has never been perfectly safe without chance of sickness or death. Over 35 million flu cases this year with between 25 and 60K deaths. Why weren’t we doing this to protect them, did those lives not matter? Because it doesn’t make sense to live like this and have everybody miss out on their lives, rather than accept that sickness and death are a natural part of life.
My mom lives in a nursing home, two of the care workers there got it. All the residents have tested negative despite that. So it is possible to protect those at high risk to some extent, without having to lock down the whole population. It can spread without killing all those at high risk like some fear, because masks and other protective measures do work even if someone has it. If they did not actually work, why wear masks?
I think most people have done what they can to adhere to social isolation and masks, staying home or even being forced into unemployment, but that can’t last forever. If you knew you could live like this for the rest of your life and never get sick, but never see a sporting event, comedy show, socialize, go anywhere without a mask, or see your kids go to school and play sports or other activities… how much would life be worth? Suicide would surely become the number one cause of death, because this is all depressing as F. We can’t lose our courage and common sense, become a society of control freaks, and stop living because of something that the vast majority of people would not die from. Many at high risk wouldn’t want their children and grandchildren to miss out on their lives like this for their sake to begin with. And it isn’t being selfish to value your quality of life and to stand up for it, no matter what anybody says.
I think something like 40% of all deaths are people living in nursing homes. And something like 33% of all deaths were in New York (probably some double coverage in the numbers there.) But when like 65% of all deaths are in nursing homes or NY, everyone not in a nursing home living outside of New York, should feel pretty ok.
A very short sighted answer. What about the folks infected (some, who died) working in food processing plants or auto factories. Hot spots, concentrated outbreaks are popping up everywhere. Get real. This is a health emergency, not political maneuvering.
wow that’s great. they could have agreed to the deferred money solution and the players association would have accepted. instead they made a solution worse than expected. i would feel insulted too if i was in the players association.
Thanks China.
Just what the world needs , millionaires and billionaires fighting over money. Both players and owners should take a serious look at what’s going on in the world today and be grateful they are in the position they are in financially. I hope they don’t play at all. Baseball was almost dead anyway, this may be the time to put a fork in MLB.
I find it just disgusting that they are still discussing this as if it weren’t a human life involved. if i had to put my families life in danger, by coming in contact with people where I don’t know where they have been I would want as much money as I could get. so owners just give players full salary.
Who asked the doctors and nurses if they want to go to work? Who asked the grocery store workers if they wanted to go to work? What choice do people working at Wal-Mart or Target or Costco have in the salary? What union rep should have stood up for the person delivering the mail to see if they wanted to deliver to 500 houses every day? These are people really at risk of getting sick. Check the Korean baseball league….. not much risk being on a 25-man roster with regular COVID-19 testing in an empty stadium.
just insulting to make the guys owed more take less of their money. this was the only possible proposal worse than the proportional pay cut that would have come with a 50-50 split.
That’s dumb, I wouldn’t be discussing going back at all. What type of monster are you thatyou’ll put your family in danger for enough money?
also quite insulting that even $1 million guys are taking over a 50% paycut. unless all these $500 K guys are taking no cuts at all, that seems to suggest the owners believe they make very little from TV money, which just is flat out wrong.
Let’s just keep this simple. Prorate all player salaries based on games played.
That’s what has already been agreed to. Owners want them to take another cut to minimize their losses by fans not buying tickets
the problem here – which is the overall crux of the problem – is that that doesnt account for lost revenue due to games withoutvfans.
Baseball is the only sport I am fanatical about. That said, if the billionaire owners and the millionaire players are going to have a hissy fit over the economics of an abbreviated 2020 season I say screw them and just cancel it. Most of us are having enough issues dealing with this crisis and don’t want to hear about their problems. If they can’t come to a reasonable agreement during this pandemic I say an additional pox on both of their houses!
Well said. I am about through with it as well. I always swore after I started watching the game again in 1998 that if there was another strike I would be done forever. I don’t make enough money to care about the financial problems of people that should have ZERO financial problems for the rest of their lives. It’s not about taking care of their family, it’s all about greed on both sides.
The Mookie Betts trade to LA now looks interesting. I assume the trade will still stand even if Betts never plays a game for the Dodgers. Wonder if you will have teams like the Dodgers trying to get trades like that reversed if there is no season. I would think they would never reverse but you never know. This is one messed up situation. Any team that traded a player with one year left on the contract is glad they did, for now.
If this is what was offered than I do not see the season being played at all.
There shouldn’t be a season.
Too much risk…..
What risk ? Contracting a disease with a 99% survival rate ?
Lol there is no risk. Keep telling yourself there is one tho.
And all u guys talking health concerns, that’s practically irrelevant. Ppl most at risk are elderly ppl, ppl with bronchial issues, cancer and aids patients. Very few players, owners too for that matter fall into those categories. And this global killer pandemic was supposed to kill 3 million ppl. Well, the number is 100k. And when u consider the following deaths, covid is hardly a real threat
Heart disease 650k/yr
Cancer 600k/yr
Smoking 500k/yr
Accidents 170k/yr
Respiratory disease 160k/yr
Stroke 150k/yr
Alzheimers 120k/yr
Flu pneumonia 56k/yr
Suicide 50k/yr
Car wrecks 36k/yr
Ur more likely to die of an accident than from corona. Yet we disrupted and shutdown the entire country, and now arguing over the ramifications. Ur 5x more likely to die for smoking, yet millions of ppl still smoke and they’re still sold in stores. But yet ppl r terrified of a disease that they are not even in a high risk demographic for and only reached 5% of the projections. It’s not that bad
Also when you consider the Cova-19 numbers have been inflated. How come the NBA players don’t have a problem restarting their season ? The owners and players agreed to a salary format.
MLB always has a way of shooting themselves in the foot.. I love Baseball it’s my favorite sport. But if they cancel the season over $$$$$ MLB is going to loose the marginal fan. And maybe a lot of hardcore fans tired of players who make millions crying about being underpaid for a shorten season.
There were so many things to look forward to this season.
Teams going after Houston
Betts in LA
Rendon in the same line up with Trout.
Maddon back with The Angels
The real solution is to allow at least some fans to go to games, maybe make it exclusive to outdoor stadiums or something. But I mean, at what point can people just wake up and question whether this virus is deadly to a broad enough category of people to justify living like this? It isn’t. I mean, is the 2021 season in jeopardy as well because nobody will be in the stands? How about football and basketball? No college or highschool sports anywhere, no sports at any age among kids? No kids in school in the fall? That’s crazy.
Per another post on here, my mom lives in a nursing home, two of her care workers got it. All the residents have tested negative despite that. So it is possible to protect those at high risk to some extent, without having to lock down the whole population. It can spread without killing all those at high risk like some fear, because masks and other protective measures do work even if someone has it. If they did not actually work, why wear masks?
Anyway I know I am not alone among people who would go watch a game tomorrow if it was allowed. That’s the real solution, fans back in the stands like we’re supposed to be… and it doesn’t mean that a lot of people will die necessarily, as precautions and quarantine measures can be taken to towards and by those at highest risk, without forcing everyone else to all but stop living for a year or some senseless period of time.
Of course most of these are not contagious.
However, this is a good point.
How many of the people lost to all the things you listed died in less than 3 months because with Covid 19 we will have lost more than 100.000 American’s to the Virus in a 3 month time span & you can’t say the same thing with your list
I am so sick of people talking about those most likely to die from corona as if they are completely expendable. I might not be elderly, but there are people I care about that are. I am a man, but I still support breast cancer research even though I am not likely to ever die from it. Show some empathy for fellow human beings.
Also that 100,000 people that you just consider expendable happened in a little over 2 months and you comparing that number with year long numbers. If corona keeps up the same pace, we, in effect, have a contagious form of cancer killing our population. If that doesn’t scare you into at least a little bit of worry, then you just have no soul.
The billionaire boot lickers are out in full force today.
I googled “what percentage of MLB players make at least a million dollars per season,” and found this very interesting article…
beyondtheboxscore.com/2019/7/23/20703711/stop-call…
The article compares annual player salaries (including minor leaguers) and claims it’s inaccurate to refer to players as millionaires. Then it compares that to a team’s valuation (which is influenced by current and expected future income) to claim that it’s legit to call individual owners billionaires. The flaws in logic should be obvious.
I honestly didn’t care about the title of the article; just wanted to find out how many players make a million bucks a year or more. TL:DR – 398 of the 1,267 MLBPA members earn $1 million dollars or more [in 2019], or 31.4 percent. Also from the same article: Average salary: $10,134,179, median salary: $8,200,000. So, under one third of the league’s players make a million dollars or more per season, yet the “average salary” per player is over $10MM per season. Shows how much of a disparity there is in salaries, and also shows how skewed stats can be. The average salary s $10MM, yet 2/3 of the league’s players make less than a million.
I think it’s wise to keep stuff like this in mind when either side tosses around terms like “average income.”
Yeah most players in the league are Pre-Arb, with salaries well below $1M.
My issue with the article is how the author claims that “millionaires vs. billionaires” is invalid because when you plot the distribution of the players’ annual salaries, most don’t make >$1M/yr. Then he compares this to team valuation(!) to claim that all owners are billionaires! It never occurs to the author why this is apples and oranges, or he’s just hoping the reader won’t notice. Then he concludes we must therefore side with players because they aren’t really millionaires:
“This being established, it seems fair to refer to the owners as “billionaires” after all. Keep that in mind when you choose a side in the labor debate to come.”
BS for the players but hopefully they accept it and we can see some much need sports but just baseball
Yes, but even a prorated minimum salary is well within the top 10 % incomes, and the MLBPA ISN’T arguing for the minor leaguers, and totally should; they’re making maybe 30000, and the union isn’t doing ANYTHING for them?!
The union doesn’t give two flying f*ks about anybody other than the very top MLB players.
While I enjoy hypothetical rants on numerous subjects. The fact of the matter is the average sports fan is going to be addressing far more serious issues in the near future. I don’t care which side you’re on. Major League baseball is dead. Most people just don’t know it yet.
I firmly believe the owners ( and to a lesser degree) the players have been itching for a fight. It was going to happen now, or when the CBA ended.
So that means a player making minimum-wage ($555k in 2019) would be making $240,870 (or 43.4% of $555k) before taxes.
The owners offer was designed to fail. I strongly suspect there are more than a few teams that simply did not want to play this season, and not playing gives an excuse not to sign free agents and be charged with collusion.
I agree with you. Maybe the top end tax works to some degree but guys making a mill have higher bills than me( I’m no millionaire but I do live in California which takes money out of my pocket at every turn, ha)and would never agree to it. If I’m small market, other than the rays who I think are itching to play cuz they can squeeze a championship out of short season, i don’t want to play at all, if we’re talking strictly business and nothing else…
Ante up, billionaires.
billionaires vs millionaires.
there are real people suffering. accept it and move on.
Cancel the season.
No way! I would propose that they get a prorated salary for the season minus what they were paid so far. That would seem fair.
On that note though, this was a real slick proposal in that the majority of the players in the union are in the range where they would get most of their salary. Sly move by the owners there. Pit the players against each other
Agree^
The players should have just taken the 50/50 split. It really doesn’t matter if the owners are screwing them over, 7.8 million for the highest paid and 260,000 for the lowest paid, plus meal money, health care, and travel accommodations is plenty for THREE MONTHS of work. They would be trading money for good Will of the American people. If they don’t play this year that means no revenue, which means no money for free agents so the players will spend all of 2021 complaining free agents didn’t make enough after spending 2020 not playing because they didn’t get paid enough. No one will go to the games in 2021 and the owners will ask for more at the table after 2021 and they won’t play in 2022 either.
The billionaires were billionaires BEFORE they bought the teams and will be without the sport. If the players don’t play now then the fans will hate them until 2025 at the earliest. Take the paycheck, 30 million unemployed people don’t want to hear 260k isn’t good enough.
Those are huge cuts. I know many of us have little sympathy for guys earning this much, but it’s a lot of $ they are asking the players to swallow. The proposal is this bad because they’d rather the players turn it down. They’ve crunched the numbers and figure that the cost savings this year, in the next several years from depressed salaries, and a firehose of cheap talent through changes in the draft, make it worth their while to close, unless they get a fabulous deal.
I agree…
The owners should propose to defer the difference. Player contracts aren’t based on revenue and 2020 should be no different.
Most of you all are quite clueless since you seem to forget this is a negotiation. According to some of you geniuses, the owners should offer a deal that places them in a worse position. If I recall my basic economics courses in contracts one never offers a price above what they are willing to pay. You always offer below your preferred position so you have room to in order to reach the point you do prefer. You never offer your preferred position first.
No wonder most of you hate rich people, you have no concept of the price system.
Every other sport will figure it out, while Baseball will fight in public.
other sports have, in general, open book policies. mlb owners don’t want anyone to see them.
Rob Manfred is bringing the game to its knees
mlb has a tv deal with fox sports at $5.1 billion. each team gets $170 million along with team’s own tv deal. in angels case, they signed a $3 billion over 25 years which is $120 million per year. that’s $290 million on tv alone! and he, the cheapo, stopped paying most workers. the team’s 40 men payroll was projected to be $190 million. according to league/union agreement, if they get to play 81 games, arte only needs to pay roughly half of that.
so, a half season played, there will be an income of appx. $145 million and pay appx $95 million. so there are $50 mil,l plus whatever they get from ads, for the owners. arte said a couple of years ago he only took around a mil. and now the owners want a bigger cut from players? as they say in spanish, codos!
I believe it’s 5.1 billion over 7 years. 525 million annually.
thanks!
Your revenue arguement had legs til you discounted all other operating expenses.
Rent
Equipment
Overhead
Whatever is paid to MLB office
Salaries, and benefits
Required payouts to local parasites like politicians
Upkeep
Taxes
Training sites
…the list goes on and on.
No one outside the inner circle knows how truly profitable or unprofitable each team is, but on here, we have 231 Warren Buffets who know how to spend other peoples money quite well.
And yes, I do believe each team is profitable, and there is money, but each owner assumes full risk, and has undisclosed responsibilities to investors etc. And if that teams stadium is subsidized by a tax base, I believe an owner or ownership group has an ethical responsibility to produce a “good” product for its city, but again, none of the experts on here are financially skilled enough to have all the inputs into those complex decisions.
greedy f’in players and owners can’t come to an agreement during a pandemic and it’s over money … how many fans who have lost jobs, lost family, lost friends, have had their lives changed completely and maybe forever … how many will sympathize with either side? i remember 1994 very well, swore them off then, it took ripken to bring me back … i’m not seeing another ripken this time. i have already gotten used to not having baseball this season … as far as i’m concerned, both sides can go f themselves if they can’t figure this out. not being glued to the tv or radio every night for baseball has been kind of refreshing … i’m even tuning out sports talk radio. get it together MLB or else this is going to go south for you very very quick.
Nearly 40 million people in the United States have become unemployed the last two months and players are angry that a $1M contract will pay $434K.
It is impossible for me to have any sympathy for them whatsoever.
Of course it is because it’s easy to blame millionaires instead of billionaires makes sense lol
Both sides are to blame no matter how anybody spins it…it’s greed all the way around and both sides stink of it. The fans get screwed because mlb products will no doubtedly get more over-priced then they already are. Don’t have to buy anything if you think it’s overpriced…to that I say…you’re damn right and I won’t.
Over the weekend, I enjoyed the candid look of golfers and football players competing together for charity; listening in to their discussions. Baseball could have this too. A one time chance, be it a part season or exhibition games for fans to get closer at the personalities of their teams on the field, the dugout and the bullpen.
closer? only 6ft or more
Because viruses are limited to a travel distances of 5ft 11in or less.
No disrespect to Clark. But he’s no Marvin Miller or Donald Fehr. The MLBPA Should have a high profile well respected lawyer running the show. Then maybe the owners won’t be playing games.
Trying to understand the league’s perspective and the union’s perspective is like trying to stick your head up your ass by leaning all the way forward, then by leaning backward.
Manfred is the worst commissioner in sports and Clark is the worst union president in sports. There’s a good chance we’re not going to have baseball this year not because of COVID-19 but because these two Darwinian mistakes somehow rose to positions of importance.
Well…
..you could get a good look at a T-bone steak by looking up a bull’s ( ! )…or you could just take the butcher’s word for it…
The more I think about it, this is what I see happening:
1. This is what the owners are willing to pay the players THIS year.
2. The players come back with their proposal. Let’s say, for example, it’s an across-the-board 10% pay cut off the prorated salaries. This signifies the amount they would play for.
3. The owners offer to meet that/they meet in the middle with deferred money.
This way, there’s an agreement by June 1 and ball can start around the Fourth of July.
Especially if the owners anticipated that the player’s counter will be adding games, it could be a way for the owners to get the players to add games/agree to doubleheader’s without the owners suggesting it.
They don’t have much time to go back and forth on this, so why come up with a sliding scale they had to know the players would reject?
There will not be a baseball season. Players are way too greedy to do what is best for the game. They don’t care what is best for the game. Baseball in 2021 promises to be the beginning of a very different game.. The minor league system for one is broken. Teams pay millions of dollars annually to develop a handful of players into viable major leagues. Why encourage fans to go to a local minor league free game when they might otherwise be at home watching the big league club on tv? This upcoming five round draft is another step toward reducing minor leagues. Look for mlb to eventually adopt the nba model with each club having a single development team. Couple with an academy approach for international players to acclimate. MLB will sponsor independent leagues around the country. But that will basically consist of paying for bats and balls.
Maybe the virus was leaked from the basement of a lab at Rob Manfred’s house, by the owners, to reduce high priced MLB salaries? LOL
10 years ago the players got 36% of the pie, now they get 29%. This is why the union is leary of the owners. They have smart people running their business. They have stopped paying average players who reach free agency too. I think they need to come to an agreement on this one, or the fans are going to turn on baseball. They need to tread lightly here.
You can blame the owners for a lot of things, but you cannot blame the owners for not wanting to pay someone millions of dollars to sit on the bench and play once a week. Maybe the fairest comparison is Hollywood. Dwayne Johnson ( who people pay to see and makes Studios money) gets millions, but the guy who plays Thug #1 and is 20th in the credits makes scale.
Not sure where your numbers are coming from, but last year the average MLB franchise revenue was $ 330 million and the average player payroll was $ 110 million. That’s roughly 33%.
Looking at other numbers, fan attendance, parking, and concessions account for 43% of revenue. Therefore 57% will remain. With that in mind play half a schedule would result in owners realizing roughly 29% of revenue versus a full season. If you look at the current proposal it will work out to roughly that type of percentage, with a small emphasis on helping the low end and getting that money from the high end.
In my view the owners could keep the low end skew while allowing more on the high end. So the guy that had a $ 35 M full salary would get $ 10 M instead of almost % 8 M.
There are always going to be fans that are anti-owner and pro-owner.
No one should have to run a business in the red. I I would imagine if every owner was able to just cover his expenses this year, they’d jump at it.
But right now, there are no winners, just degrees of losing. The owners are trying to figure out how to lose less and the players have every right to not play a season for a fraction of their salary.
I don’t know how this can work out.
So you think the players have the right to full pay with no deductions?