Sign in to follow this  
AngelsWin.com

AngelsWin.com Today: 2020 Angelswin.com Primer Series: Finances

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

Confirmed after Teheran signing 

Actual payroll is around 170M.

Luxury tax payroll is around 181M

Give or take 2M. But thats the ballpark. 

Hi Jeff,

Did you mean to have those flipped? I realized that I have been using incorrect terminology for the last few years in the Primer Series because the Collective Bargaining Agreement uses the terms 'Club Payroll' for the exact amount that is paid by Moreno in a year whereas 'Actual Club Payroll' is used to describe payroll with Average Annual Value. You used 'Luxury Tax Payroll' for your $181M amount and that has me confused because it appears that the AAV number should be less? I highlighted the update with Teheran below and I am sure the numbers you quoted are precise (mine are off obviously by a bit) but if you flip your numbers it makes more sense to me. Maybe my chart is incorrect?

Capture.PNG

Thoughts on the discrepancy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Angel Oracle said:

That would mean just under $22 million under the tax threshold.    Can they sign Ryu and either Jason Castro or Machete?

Probably not Ryu or Keuchel and Castro....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ettin said:

Thoughts on the discrepancy?

The benefits don’t count toward the real cash-flow payroll. I believe that comes out of a different budget as far as the team is concerned when calculating its annual cash flow. 
 

When I say “actual payroll,” I am talking about the actual salaries paid to the major league roster, period. 
 

When I say “luxury tax payroll,” I mean the sum of the AAV’s (including the arbs and 0-3s) plus $15M for benefits. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

The benefits don’t count toward the real cash-flow payroll. I believe that comes out of a different budget as far as the team is concerned when calculating its annual cash flow. 
 

When I say “actual payroll,” I am talking about the actual salaries paid to the major league roster, period. 
 

When I say “luxury tax payroll,” I mean the sum of the AAV’s (including the arbs and 0-3s) plus $15M for benefits. 

Would you do me a huge solid and verify this? It was always my understanding (and I fully admit that I could be completely wrong here) that benefits were a part of real cash-flow payroll (or as the CBA calls it 'Club Payroll')?

Sorry but this is kind of important to me from a curiosity standpoint on how teams parse their financials and budgets. Would be nice to know if I have been doing it wrong this whole time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, ettin said:

Would you do me a huge solid and verify this? It was always my understanding (and I fully admit that I could be completely wrong here) that benefits were a part of real cash-flow payroll (or as the CBA calls it 'Club Payroll')?

Sorry but this is kind of important to me from a curiosity standpoint on how teams parse their financials and budgets. Would be nice to know if I have been doing it wrong this whole time.

The actual payroll, as I’m referring to, is what matters to the individual club as they do their accounting. So it has nothing to do with the CBA. It’s whatever they want it to be. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

The actual payroll, as I’m referring to, is what matters to the individual club as they do their accounting. So it has nothing to do with the CBA. It’s whatever they want it to be. 

So let me rephrase the question: What leads you to understand that year-to-year club payroll does not include Benefits? The CBA is very specific that Benefits must be added to the AAV value calculation but it does not mention anything about it being added to what you refer to as 'actual payroll'. I understand that this might come out of a different budget but is there a source that states this or is this simply coming from a source in the front office or what?

What I am asking is how do we know for sure that the actual outlay of cash year-to-year for player salaries does not include Benefits? I find it strange that they so specifically add it to the AAV calculation but not to year-to-year payroll numbers. I suppose it is an obtuse tool used to caution clubs from exceeding the CBT threshold but it is unclear (and maybe we are not meant to see it) which I find annoying when trying to build the Primer Series financial table.

I appreciate your time Jeff I am not trying to be difficult but if I have been doing it wrong I'd like to correct it moving forward and would appreciate any additional insight, pointing to an official MLB document that states the policy, or even asking Billy Eppler directly if Benefits are a part of the total budget outlay that includes player salaries.

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ettin said:

So let me rephrase the question: What leads you to understand that year-to-year club payroll does not include Benefits? The CBA is very specific that Benefits must be added to the AAV value calculation but it does not mention anything about it being added to what you refer to as 'actual payroll'. I understand that this might come out of a different budget but is there a source that states this or is this simply coming from a source in the front office or what?

What I am asking is how do we know for sure that the actual outlay of cash year-to-year for player salaries does not include Benefits? I find it strange that they so specifically add it to the AAV calculation but not to year-to-year payroll numbers. I suppose it is an obtuse tool used to caution clubs from exceeding the CBT threshold but it is unclear (and maybe we are not meant to see it) which I find annoying when trying to build the Primer Series financial table.

I appreciate your time Jeff I am not trying to be difficult but if I have been doing it wrong I'd like to correct it moving forward and would appreciate any additional insight, pointing to an official MLB document that states the policy, or even asking Billy Eppler directly if Benefits are a part of the total budget outlay that includes player salaries.

Thanks!

Ok. Let me rephrase it. I’m sorry I’m used the word “actual.” All I’m talking about is the “Sum of the Salaries,” because as Eppler builds the team that’s the number he’s got to use as far as Arte is concerned. 

I was told that lately the Arte’s budget for the salaries is 170-180M, so when I’m talking about Eppler has left to spend, it’s that. When Arte says the payroll is going up, he means that is going up. 
 

It has zero to do with the CBA so there are no “rules” about it. Rob Manfred doesn’t set the Angels budget. Arte does. 
 

I’m talking about the limitations from Arte. Not the luxury tax or the CBA.

I hope that’s clear. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, ettin said:

I find it strange that they so specifically add it to the AAV calculation but not to year-to-year payroll numbers

I suppose the point is, although the Angels pay it, it probably is pretty much the same no matter the salaries. So when they’re talking about room to add salary, that number is not part of the equation. 
 

They also pay for all the baseballs and batting helmets but they don’t add that into the payroll budget. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, ettin said:

I find it strange that they so specifically add it to the AAV calculation but not to year-to-year payroll numbers.

I was thinking more about this and it’s actually probably just the owners screwing the players a little, by adding something that makes the luxury tax threshold lower than it is appears. If the figure is roughly the same for all teams, why include it? 
 

It’s saying “The threshold is $208M (but psssst, you can only really spend $193M of that on salaries. Shhhhhh.)”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

I was thinking more about this and it’s actually probably just the owners screwing the players a little, by adding something that makes the luxury tax threshold lower than it is appears. If the figure is roughly the same for all teams, why include it? 
 

It’s saying “The threshold is $208M (but psssst, you can only really spend $193M of that on salaries. Shhhhhh.)”

it's really only applicable to a few teams.  Most of them aren't even going to come close so to me its more of a means to keep those high revenue teams from having more of an advantage.  Being able to spend an extra 15m only really helps the dogs, yanks, red sox and maybe a couple of others.  It's a way for mlb and mid/small market teams to control the larger market teams.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dochalo said:

it's really only applicable to a few teams.  Most of them aren't even going to come close so to me its more of a means to keep those high revenue teams from having more of an advantage.  Being able to spend an extra 15m only really helps the dogs, yanks, red sox and maybe a couple of others.  It's a way for mlb and mid/small market teams to control the larger market teams.  

That’s the case with the whole luxury tax concept in the first place, regardless of how it’s calculated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this