Comments for Detailed Financial Info from Pirates, Rays, Marlins, Angels, and Mariners Sees Light of Day at http://bizofbaseball.com , comment 1 to 8 out of 8 comments http://bizofbaseball.com Mon, 20 May 2013 16:18:29 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4654:detailed-financial-info-from-pirates-rays-marlins-angels-and-mariners-released&catid=26:editorials&Itemid=39#comment-2334 The Marlin's financial information says that the Partners who own the Marlins have a deficient capital of $61.4 million... I'm not an accountant or into finance, but doesn't that mean that the Marlins, in the long run, owe more than they are worth? Also, it appears that the financing for the Marlin's new stadium is being included in their accounting. - Maija Wed, 25 Aug 2010 13:08:40 +0100 http://bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4654:detailed-financial-info-from-pirates-rays-marlins-angels-and-mariners-released&catid=26:editorials&Itemid=39#comment-2328 Maury - great stuff, but I noticed an error in the first chart. You accidentally used the 2008 Pirates Net Income for the table on Operating Income. 2008 Pirates Operating Income was $21,790,402. You can definitely see why other owners are pissed at the Marlins! - batpig Tue, 24 Aug 2010 11:17:32 +0100 http://bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4654:detailed-financial-info-from-pirates-rays-marlins-angels-and-mariners-released&catid=26:editorials&Itemid=39#comment-2322 They mentioned that salary can actually be written off, how do they do that? Is it considered a capital asset and they write off the depreciation? - bigtrojaned Mon, 23 Aug 2010 19:34:41 +0100 http://bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4654:detailed-financial-info-from-pirates-rays-marlins-angels-and-mariners-released&catid=26:editorials&Itemid=39#comment-2319 Operating income reflects the "cost" of doing business (salaries, stadium upkeep, etc, etc). To help non-finance types, you may be better served when defining Net Income to change the word "cost" to "financing" -- which broadly includes everything you mention (ie depreciation, interest, taxes, and other expenses which are usually defined as unusual and extraordinary). Very sad day to learn the poor (losing teams) get richer by taking $$ from the teams trying to compete. - Shoeless Mon, 23 Aug 2010 13:46:45 +0100 http://bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4654:detailed-financial-info-from-pirates-rays-marlins-angels-and-mariners-released&catid=26:editorials&Itemid=39#comment-2318 It's also possible that some of the concessions revenue would turn up elsewhere. For instance, the vendor might pay a fee upfront for the exclusive rights, which would be recorded one place in the financial data. In that case, the shared revenue from sales would be recorded in another place, would have no offsetting expenses, and would be only a portion of the total generated by concessions. - Bruc Mon, 23 Aug 2010 11:26:30 +0100 http://bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4654:detailed-financial-info-from-pirates-rays-marlins-angels-and-mariners-released&catid=26:editorials&Itemid=39#comment-2315 I think it probably is a function of the agreement with Aramark (or Centerplate, or whoever). The concessionaire covers their costs, and then splits the remainder based on some percentage. So it's technically revenue, but it also has no offsetting cost. - Mitch Mon, 23 Aug 2010 07:02:03 +0100 http://bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4654:detailed-financial-info-from-pirates-rays-marlins-angels-and-mariners-released&catid=26:editorials&Itemid=39#comment-2314 I have a hard time buying the concession revenue. It can't be as simple as revenue -- are we sure they're not reporting PROFIT rather than revenue? In Pittsburgh last month, I bought about $30 in food and beverages, plus a hat. I watched a concessionaire sell 100 bottles of water in my section alone on a hot day. I just have a hard time imagining that revenue is $10 pp, let alone $5 pp, let alone less. I can believe that the profit margin is thinner than we believed, but even then ... - Will Carroll Mon, 23 Aug 2010 04:50:58 +0100 http://bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4654:detailed-financial-info-from-pirates-rays-marlins-angels-and-mariners-released&catid=26:editorials&Itemid=39#comment-2311 Thanks for outlining this against the other teams. The difference in TV and concession dollars between the FL teams and the others is rather surprising, even with attendance issues put in play. I'm most shocked by the lack of TV revenue. I wonder if Tampa Bay has a projected revenue model for what they could pull in for concession if they moved the stadium to the other side of the bay; I don't think the TV money would be affected in the slightest. - Jason Collette Mon, 23 Aug 2010 03:49:59 +0100