Major League Baseball and the MLB Players Association have had a preliminary conversation about the sport’s economic structure, report Ken Rosenthal and Evan Drellich of The Athletic. It’s not an official start to bargaining but represents their first known talks of any kind with the collective bargaining agreement a little over a year away from expiration. Respective lead negotiators Dan Halem (MLB) and Bruce Meyer (MLBPA) were both present, according to the report.
It’s more a symbolic discussion than anything else. Drellich and Rosenthal write that substantive bargaining is unlikely to begin until next spring. This served as an opportunity for each side to lay out diverging views of the game’s economics. It is widely expected that the sides will not be able to line up on a new deal before the expiration of the current CBA on December 1, 2026. If that’s the case, MLB would immediately implement a lockout to freeze the 2026-27 offseason.
Commissioner Rob Manfred said last winter that an offseason lockout is likely to be the new norm. While the league doesn’t technically need to implement a lockout once the CBA expires, it behooves them to do so. Waiting would otherwise give the MLBPA the ability to strike, ceding the leverage for timing a work stoppage to the players.
The 2021-22 lockout lasted 99 days. It was the first official work stoppage in MLB since the 1994-95 strike that canceled the ’94 World Series. (One could argue there was an unofficial work stoppage in 2020, when negotiations about prorated salaries delayed the return to play coming out of the first few months of the pandemic.) The ’22 lockout did not result in any forfeited games, though Opening Day was pushed back by about a week and a half. It’s generally believed that MLB will make another push for a salary cap, which the players union has maintained is a non-starter, in the upcoming CBA talks.
The previous lockout was during the 2021-2022 offseason, not 2022-2023.
Fans don’t need this just get it over with BUB!!
Fans don’t need what?
Fans don’t need a three year old handle pretending to be a world champion.
Oh, come on! Let the guy enjoy his relatively recent World Series win!
The same set of circumstances existed at this time in 1993 and the players went on strike in August 1994. I wonder if there is any appetite for them to do it again.
mark1623: And what circumstances specifically?
If there’s a lockout, there can’t be a strike.
There can’t be a strike. There won’t be a chance that the owners don’t lock them out first.
My question is why wouldn’t the players strike during the season like they did in 1994? They knew they’d be locked out in 1995 if they played out the season so they acted early, when they had more leverage (owners make a disproportionate amount of their money during the playoffs and players have already received most of their salary by August).
I’m not sure if I understand your question, so forgive me if I am misinterpreting it, but players would be in breach of the current CBA if they strike before it expires.
Ah, I see the issue now. MLB was playing without a CBA in 1994 after it expired at the end of 1993. Clearly owners won’t be doing that again.
Welcome to a salary floor and salary cap after 2026. You can thank the Dodgers and to a lesser extent the Mets and Yankees for this outcome.
It’s cute that you think owners still won’t go for the maximum profit possible. How are Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny?
You think ticket prices will be lower following a lockout? What is your basis for that analysis? P.S. attendance was up again this past season.
I see. You didn’t say “lower.”
So the family of four will be able afford to go to a game without skipping a car payment with what? Higher ticket prices? The same ticket prices as now? Magic?
I don’t think you really understand the basic principles of supply and demand and equilibrium.
You want economics? Stu Sternberg bought the Tampa Bay franchise for $200 million 18 years ago.
He just sold it for 1.7 BILLION.
Running expenses be damned.
aha, I yearn to live in this price stabilized utopia you mentioned. I remember when gas prices leveled out at well. that was a time called never.
The maximum number that people will pay for it is the price. Period. Profit is dependent on price minus expenses. Price is determined solely by demand
Are you suggesting a cap at gate prices?! It’s no one’s fault. It’s the market price that’s being paid. The Invisible Hand is what determines the price.
C’mon, this is high school level stuff and should be understood by everyone.
The Invisible Hand is an economic term in use for a couple hundred years. Don’t bother looking it up, you wouldn’t understand it anyways.
@TheGreatOne
If I charge $1 per ticket to reach full stadium capacity of 10,000, I take in $10k. If I charge $2 per ticket to sell 5000 seats, I take in the same amount. Why I would sell tickets for $1 when it increases my stadium labor costs and expenses? What if I charge $2.50 or $3 per ticket? Will I take in more than $10k? See how that works? It’s the same principles behind stadium concessions and merchandise pricing.
Player labor costs and TV revenues have no relations to the above hypothetical.
TheGreatOne
the revenue need not increase to maintain profit.
===================
Tickets prices increase when attendance increases. It’s simple supply and demand. If the demand for uranium doubles, my boss will raise prices no matter what my salary is.
toptimrubies
I remember when gas prices leveled out at well.
============================
What some people choose to ignore is inflation. Prices, on a macro level, increase every year. Salaries, on a macro level, increase every year.
TheGreatOne
By that logic it’s the fans fault cause they keep paying it.
=======================
You’re trying too hard to find fault where there is none. I really like the 1960s Chevelles. Is it my fault for being willing to pay a big price, or the owner’s fault for wanting a big price.
The truth is, there is no fault.
The Invisible Hand is what determines the price.
===================
It should be understood, but we don’t teach it enough. It’s a fascinating subject when you get into the weeds, and what drives the entire economy.
There are tons of stuff that I never quite understood, but I can accept that they work.
TheGreatOne: But revenue must grow to increase profit, which is and should be the goal of any business.
Ticket prices are based on demand, not player salaries.
you are in for a rude awakening oh great one
TheGreatOne: If you actually believe lower player compensation would result in lower ticket and concession prices, you’re seriously too naive to be an adult.
Thank the ticket resellers.
Good luck with that.
Labor negotiations aren’t binary.
There will not be a cap. It will not happen.
It’s downright bizarre that the single issue on which the players are least likely to concede is the one that many fans believe they must and will give up. And it is stranger still when we realize that it would benefit the fans not one iota if it did happen. The only gain would be to the owners. Yet many fans seem prepared to sacrifice the game itself to this pointless and completely self-defeating issue. They seem to know not what they want.
Some fans can only talk about of their behinds thinking they know better than the Players Association. Which is why they’re not playing professional baseball and therefore not part of the Players Association.
I truly don’t think the owners care one bit. If given a choice between a % of revenue at a level of the NFL/NBA, or no salary cap, imho, they’ll simply pass on it.
That said, they will scream ‘bankruptcy’ until the players give something back. While the players will scream about being able to feed their kids, waiting for the owners to give something back.
That’s just the way life works.
Yes, there’s literally no scenario where the MLBPA agrees to that. If the owners hold out for that, the entire 2027 season will be cancelled.
And that just gives the Dodgers a chance to rest after playing an extra month of baseball for a number of years straight on to their way to a threepeat, hopefully.
Am these long postseason runs take a toll on the players.
Look I don’t pretend to know what the answer is. I can only state with certainty what the answer ISN’T. And that’s another lockout(Strike). Once again baseball takes a giant leap towards making fans happy with a successful Playoff only to seemingly defecate on them the following season. If this season is boring AND then the games are cancelled it could take them years to recover. It better be a 20 year CBA. And even that may not help. I’d tread carefully if I were them.
The truth of the matter is ownership is even more aware of the MLBPA’s position on a cap than we are. They will use it as a bargaining chip, and once again, not in good faith. In the end, they are not prepared to die on that hill.
My point is no fan should want to see this battle, and they certainly should not be anxious to sacrifice any part of any season over it. The reasons some fans think they need to take this stand (against their own interests) is a belief that it would increase competition — a false hope. This is not why ownership pushes for a salary cap at every CBA. It is nothing more than an effort to reduce their expenses and increase profits.
They already have all the power they need to increase competition. This is not their goal. Their goal is for every owner to see a solid return on their investment. The current financial system does that for them very nicely.
And why do think it should be on the players to increase competition?
Winning or money — easy choice, take the money. Individual players can always sign below market deals to chase a ring if that’s what they want.
And shouldn’t it first be on the owners to share revenue, then maybe the players agree to a cap/floor based on a percentage of revenue?
They have a whole year to work on it! Why not just start now and try to get it done BEFORE striking or locking out?
That is a logical thought, but both sides will have to feel pain before an agreement is reached. There is very little history of common sense dictating a solution before pain is endured. The rhetoric is already starting. Manfred didn’t go into the Phillies clubhouse because he thought negotiations would be smooth.
I will gladly take no baseball in 2027 if it means fixing the system. You can’t have one team raking in over 300 million from their local TV deal and then have others struggling to even hit 50 million.
I agree that there probably won’t ever be a salary cap, but the luxury taxes and the rules on deferments and salary floors need to be addressed.
The NBA and NFL have figured it out. It’s time for baseball to do the same.
48% of all national sources of MLB teams’ revenue like TV rights and merchandise are distributed equally among all 30 teams. The Local Revenue Sharing Plan takes a percentage of each team’s “net local revenue” (from local media, tickets, concessions, ticket sales, local broadcasting rights, parking, and sponsorships within a team’s local market.etc.
Be informed.
Increasing the percentage shared might have some merit. But stop throwing numbers around that are misleading.
The NBA has a tiered pay system that will not work in Baseball and the NFL has one or two high priced players per team with massive roster turnover every season. There are no lessons to be learned there.
The tv money in the NFL comes solely through nationally televised games as there are no local tv deals in Football. The NBA has the same local issues as MLB but makes up for it by having nationally televised or streamed games every night of the week spread over multiple networks ensuring that even the worst teams benefit from some sort of nationalexposure. The ratings however have been a mixed bag of decent to dreadful over the past few years
The issue with sharing revenue is not with the players. It is with the owners. The large market teams cost double or triple the small market teams. The LAD owner is going to tell you that they are a $6B team because of their revenue flows. If they have to give away half of it, the value of the franchise decreases. Would you voluntarily give up half your income?
And they will also object to small market spending. They will rightfully say that Cincy and Pitt can increase their ticket sales substantially if they lay out some money for more hitting.
@C’Bad – The reality is that, like all economic systems, there is no “fix” that cleans it all up…there are only stages of the work in progress.
The money has become so stupendously large that the friction is almost inevitable. Friction between players and owners; players and their own representation; owners and other owners, minor leaguers and major league players; fans and agents and so on.
Market parity is too one-sided but the fix is unclear; poor ownership stewardship is a big issue but the mlb monopoly is loathe to discipline their own; all costs are now too high for the average fan and perspectives are too narrow. They will probably end up with another painfully wrought compromise that will only lead to the next argument a few years later.
And every day of a lockout will mean some fans turn away. Some for good. MLB doesn’t need a repeat of 93/94.
They already have a good thing going, attendance up, popularity right around the world. And they’re about to mess it all up due to their own greed.
A cap, or floor, or both, isn’t suddenly going to make mediocre teams good. Cheap owners & idiotic owners will stay cheap and idiotic, and their teams will still suck. As Kerry Packer used to tell Richie Benaud, “Don’t get bitter, get better”.
Not necessarily a lockout, but every day games get cancelled.
That’s an argument in favor of immediately locking out so as to enact leverage to more quickly get to a new CBA, precisely to avoid losing actual games.
It ideally would not come to this, but everyone seems universally resigned that it will.
There were several differences between the NBA and NFL, when they solved their major financial structure problems, and MLB today.
First and foremost, baseball players tend to have much longer careers than those in the other two sports. They can afford to sit out a lot longer to get what they want
Second, esp in the NFL, the owners were far more united…and unselfish…than MLB owners. The owners chose a very strong commissioner, and ceded a lot more power to him. Pete Rozelle had a long term vision, and the owners bought in. Many of the owners…Wellington Mara, Lamar Hunt, Art Rooney, etc… were willing to make short term sacrifices for long term league stability.
Can you imagine MLB owners agreeing to a complete share the wealth plan like the NFL has? Can you imagine the Yankees and Dodgers sharing their media revenues in equal portions with the other owners?
If the big markets teams would agree to pool assets during a long labor dispute, they could possibly outlast the players, but the small market teams will be forced to choose between disbanding or folding.
Besides, a salary cap won’t solve anything, without an NFL type of revenue sharing plan. In reality, teams with the largest media markets benefit from the present structure.
They sit at a game of no limit poker that allows table stakes only, and they start with double the stakes. They can simply raise everybody else out of the game. Why on earth would they really want to penalize themselves by agreeing to put a limit on the stakes and on the betting?
Yes. Any dollar Pittsburgh has to improve 10 teams have $3 and which player will take the $1?
If there is no salary floor/cap in 2027, I won’t be watching anymore. I’m 40 now and the most exciting thing to happen to my Reds is Todd Frazier winning a Home Run Derby. They haven’t even won a playoff game. I’m excluding 1990 when they won the World Series because I was 5.
Also, I’m tired of big market fans dismissing small market fans’ grief. It’s like a millionaire telling a struggling, but hard working low-middle class person that they just need to be smarter with their decisions. You don’t know what it’s like to be lucky to have a 1-2 year window to compete before you watch the whole team leave and that’s IF your team made great decisions and had a perfect storm. All small market fans want is a better chance to compete. Having 1/3 the payroll of another team isn’t cutting it.
It’s about the fans, not the owners.
The impetus for a salary cap is more profits for the owners. The resistance to a cap is more profit for the players. Competition is a fan concept, and they aren’t at the negotiating table.
Not necessarily. If the players get 48-50% of the revenue generated league-wide and then that’s used to create the floor/cap. The players’ wealth would grow (or shrink) with the sport.
MLB has guaranteed contracts, a rapidly expanding league revenue, and free agency virtually without limits. Why would they agree to a cap?
The top end contracts drive player profit. They will never accept anything that jeopardizes this.
Reds fans are truly a depressing and insufferable bunch. Blaming “Big Market” and uncomfortable having a “different-looking” MLB player as the face of baseball it seems.
Go watch Cricket, instead.
apropos of nothing, telling someone to go watch cricket instead of baseball as a retort is something I never had on my bingo card
Tell the current owner of the Reds to sell the team. It’s not other big market team’s fault that the owners of small market teams are greedy and incompetent.
List of players with deferred contracts. Stop complaining, many teams do it.
spotrac.com/mlb/contracts/deferred
The Lerners were deferring before deferring was cool.
I worry we’re not going to have a season in 2027, despite the momentum MLB has gained recently.
The owners don’t seem to have learned anything from 1994. And considering Manfred already said there will be a lockout, they certainly aren’t negotiating in good faith.
A lot of the owners werent there in 1994, ro be fair.
The PA is ready to ditch 2027 over the salary cap.
The owners are ready to ditch 2027 over the salary cap.
If it gets us a cap and minimum then as a fan I will ditch the 27 season with them.
At this point, Reds fans would rather have a team full of criminals and felons if it means having a salary cap.
You people are truly depressing and insufferable.
@Reds
Exhibit A disproving your thesis: The Milwaukee Brewers.
Exhibit B: The Cleveland Guardians
Exhibit C: Your Reds
Honorable mention: Tigers, D-backs
All of these teams (except Tigers who were 14th) were in the bottom half of team payrolls and all were competitive. Most made the postseason. The Brew Crew had the best record in MLB. Spending big bucks guarantees nothing.
A cap will never happen. The players will never agree to it.
Contract a couple teams and you wouldnt need a salary cap. The game would improve, as well. Instead, they want to expand-further diluting the talent pool and media territories.
160 million floor, 200 million ceiling. Although average salary may jump considerably, it may have to be adjusted lower.
MLB’s revenue-sharing system is intended to even the playing field between wealthier and less wealthy teams, but large-market clubs exploit loopholes to minimize what they pay. Teams like the Dodgers and Yankees manipulate local TV revenue reporting or create media subsidiaries to keep significant earnings from revenue-sharing pools. This allows them to outspend smaller teams and maintain talent monopolies.
Small-market teams, even those that strive to be competitive, often cannot keep up financially.
The Preacher Zone Sports Sermon: Fixing Baseball’s Money Mess
You know, every time Major League Baseball starts talking about a new Collective Bargaining Agreement, I start praying;
not for the players, not for the owners, but for my wallet that keeps buying overpriced peanuts and T shirts!!!
Now look, here’s my proposal. We do not need another CBA; we need a CBT: a Common-Sense Baseball Tax.
Here is how it works:
• High-revenue teams pay into a pot.
• That pot goes straight to the players; not the yacht club fund, not the “private island therapy retreat,” and definitely not the “owner’s midlife crisis foundation.”
• The smaller-market teams can dip into that same pot to keep their home-grown players instead of watching them run off like prodigal sons to free agency.
That way, it is a win-win!
The players make more money.
The fans keep their favorite stars.
And the owners… well, they finally learn how to share, a miracle worthy of instant replay.
We call it “Revenue Sharing for Humans.” Because right now, the owners keep splitting the profits like it is communion bread at a billionaire’s brunch.
Imagine it: The Dodgers and Yankees fund a pot that helps my dad’s Pirates pay for talent. Suddenly Pittsburgh can afford a shortstop who has hit a baseball in the last decade! My 91 year old dad loves it when they beat my Texas Rangers! :((
And the best part, it keeps the money where it belongs: on the field, not in some offshore account labeled “consulting bonus” or “emergency yacht fund.”
Baseball’s supposed to be about teamwork, right? So maybe it is time the owners joined the team.
Until then, I say we pass the CBT. Because nothing says “America’s pastime” like everyone finally paying their fair share; and nobody getting traded for tax reasons.
PK out!!!
You honestly think that if the big market teams contributed to a fund for small market teams that the owners of those small market teams would use that money to spend on players? No. The owners of small market teams would just pocket that money for themselves.
It’s in a trust fund, it can only be paid to the players, but that would make too much sense. Can we all say future strike?
But, I thought the players were doing this for the love of the game?
I support a salary floor but a salary cap isn’t needed. The only reason that the small market teams haven’t been successful is because their owners are greedy and incompetent.
Complete nonsense. In no known universe can TB’s revenue compete against the LAD’s revenue. To even suggest it is stupefying.
If they believe a lockout is coming, why not start negotiating now. Doesn’t it also behoove both sides to not miss time in a season? And with the cap issue looming large, I think this one will be a doozy.
The NHL got a hard cap after a full season lockout in 2004-5. The players gave in once it became credible that the league was unviable without a cap. Can MLB owners credibly claim that? I doubt it, but that’s what it would take. Players will be happy to call any bluffs by the owners.
There needs to be a salary floor and cap if teams don’t spend they get penalties for it just like teams who over spend. Teams should be able to compete in this market and should be able to trade future draft picks and etc for big names to stay under. The cap. It’s not going to stop players from earning more money on the market but if teams have room in their cap they get one of those guys.
There will be a cap/min, It’s just a matter of time. I have noticed that most of the “NO CAP” comments are from large market fans and they get angry. The cap/min will be the best new baseball rule since the Pitch clock, for most fans and teams. Yes I love the pitch clock,