eaterfan

45 minutes ago, Hubs said:

Owners giving out huge contracts? You mean to players? Hahaha... Baseball is a billion dollar business. This has nothing to do with player salaries. Arte bought the Angels fro $183.5M in 2003, and they're probably worth $3.5B In year 20. They show minimal operating profits for taxes, but trust me valuations do not go this high if they aren't actually all making money. The increase in net worth is 19x on his investment. (probably 14/15 if they aren't quite worth what I show).

Bally's (Sinclair) overvalued the purchase from Fox/Disney and they got in trouble. The LA Market is not one of the markets thats struggling but think Milwaukee or Kansas City.. Bally Sports West and the Angels will be fine.

 

Also, teams threaten to leave and get hundreds of millions to build new stadiums from the tax payers. It's a great way to make some money. Or buy the land around the stadium for below market and develop it and make money that way. And national TV contracts even for baseball are exploding. The owners are not hurting.

6 minutes ago, jsnpritchett said:

You do realize that Sportsnet LA was a complete disaster at first, right?  And I can't imagine an Angels-only channel (at least in a traditional cable/satellite world) would be anywhere near as in-demand as a Dodgers-centric one.

I think an equity share of Bally's would probably be better for them. 

The Pac 12 Network tried to start without a traditional partner like Fox Sports/ESPN/CBS and wasn't able to get wide enough distribution because they didn't have leverage. Also, it's really hard to start a network and it was just discovered they were overpaid by Comcast by $50 million and didn't notify them. This could lead to a few headaches. 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-01-25/sports-broadcaster-diamond-faces-8-6-billion-debt-reckoning

This is potentially very big news for the Angels and could affect payroll for awhile going forward. They may have to negotiate a lower contract and/or may have to find a different broadcast partner. Maybe I'm wrong, I'm not an expert on this, but it seems like it may be a big story going forward. 

1 hour ago, Blarg said:

It was the NCAA getting players paid without having to share their profits. It's fucking terrible for college sports. 

Why? I imagine it makes the quality of play better and more competitive overall. 

Guys can stay in school an extra year in school instead of declaring for the draft. If you're a day one or two pick in the NFL draft you probably go, but let's say you're a 4th - 7th round player. You can make equal or more money on an NIL and stay in school for another year or two and hope to improve your draft stock. If you're a QB you could make even more like DTR on UCLA. In the NBA guys who aren't lottery picks may opt to stay and guys who would be late second round picks or lottery picks can take the money and stay. Jaime Jaquez and Tiger Campbell on UCLA are great examples of this. They are both really good college players who make the game better but might not have stayed if not for NIL. 

Additionally, in football you may get a lot of good players transferring from top schools and sitting on the bench because they can get more money to start elsewhere. Why be the 3rd QB on Bama when you can get paid to go to Oregon or Washington and get playing time so you can get paid more? A backup or 3rd string QB just isn't worth the same amount of money as a starter.

I think my first point will have a bigger impact than the second. The top schools will probably have the most money to spend, but let's not pretend Bama, Georgia, Clemson, LSU, tOSU, Michigan, USC, Notre Dame weren't getting all the best recruits before this either.

This is like Reggie Bush not paying back the illegal loan he took from agents. Just really dumb to not follow through on your word when you have a lot to lose if you get caught when the other side doesn't.

20 minutes ago, Hubs said:

I don't think Samueli has the liquid assets. He's the sentimental OC choice, but the Angels would represent possibly 40% of his net worth.

 

13 minutes ago, Hubs said:

It will likely be an ownership group, and one name to watch is Theo Epstein. He's been rumored to want a Stan Kasten type deal, and though many fault Moreno for the many issues he has, it's not that he's a bad owner, he's a bad baseball guy and hasn't understood team organization and baseball decisions. Scioscia was the baseball guy in the clubhouse for 19 years, 15 under Moreno. While there were GM problems and bad decisions, not having a baseball mind in charge of the organization is the real problem, and its been exposed under the DiPoto and Eppler GM.

Stoneman also was a huge guiding influence on Moreno's early years.

But, if Epstein is interested, you have to talk to him if you're a big money guy, like Ballmer or Cuban, or others.

 

We don't really know about liquidity, but I find it hard to believe Cuban, who is worth $2.5 billion less than Samueli is more liquid and "big money", while Samueli isn't. 

I'm not sure how accurate the Google is, but Lacob is worth $1.5 billion. Way less than the value of the Angels.

1 hour ago, 79CAAman said:

I know there's been a lot of free financial advice on this board to Mr. Moreno on how he should sell the team.   This is a dicey situation, it can be a "be careful what you wish for" scenario.  I also follow the English Premiere League (Tottenham) and what's happened to the Manchester United team since the Glazers bought the team scares me.  While Mr. Moreno may have a shitty baseball organization in place, he isn't afraid to write a significant check for a big name.  I for one don't have the time or energy to protest with y'all at the stadium in the event a cheap owner buys the team.  

The Glazers have brought a ton of expensive big names to Man U. They just haven't worked out. Pogba and Ronaldo to name a few. It's the same as the Angels. 

Anyway, the Glazers have been using Man U like an ATM, accruing a lot of debt and taking cash out. It's like the McCourts. Arte never did that. But I am hoping we don't have a worst case scenario here.

Just now, Angel Oracle said:

His wife is worth a lot more than that.

Yes. But I'm not sure how they manage their funds or assets. He is the owner of the Rams and Arsenal. I don't believe they own them together. 

1 minute ago, Ace-Of-Diamonds said:

I want someone 10x as wealthy at least. Someone like the Rams owner. Someone that could spend a billion dollars the way l would spend $20.

Kroenke is worth about $10 billion per Google. 

1 minute ago, T.G. said:

She's more interesting in philanthropy. 

Angels are definitely a charity case.

Owners who make sense:

1. Samuelies (probably a partnership) - They own the Ducks and are developing the area around the Pond. They have a knowledge about how to work with Anaheim. 

2. Ballmer - has the money and is interested in sports and has a connection with the LA area

3. Cuban (in partnership) - has wanted to own an MLB team for a long time and tried to buy the Dodgers

4. Kroeke - See Balmer, but with much much less money. I don't see it with him just because he's not that much wealthier than the Samuelis. I'm not waiving off $3 billion, but it's just with the potential headaches of the development, it seems like the Samuelis are much more tied to the community and it makes it worth more to them.

I think the team goes for $2.5 billion

1 minute ago, Angelsfan1984 said:

Could end up with an owner like the A's. Tread lightly. This also puts Minasian on a very short clock.

The A's owner is only worth 2.4 billion. I don't think the Angels sell for less than that.

45 minutes ago, mmc said:

Don't think so either but weirder things have happened

It won't happen, especially in baseball. Local TV contracts are everything and the LA market is huge. That's why the Big 10 took USC and UCLA but haven't made the move for other big markets with big money like Seattle and the Bay Area. People don't realize the LA TV market (13 million people) would be the 5th largest state in the country (just ahead of Pennsylvania). Even in the NFL where there are only local tv contracts for preseason, had two teams move to LA in the last decade. No one is paying LA prices to move a team out of the LA market.

Anyway, I'd put Samueli as the odds on favorite and he'll keep the team there.

I think Samueli will be a major bidder. 

They are developing the area around the Pond and I'm sure they would like to control the development around Angels stadium if/when that happens. He also is nearly twice as wealthy as Arte.

BTW, net worth according to Google (who knows how accurate these measures are, or the liquidity situation is) has Samueli at $7.1 billion, Cuban at $4.6 billion, and Arte at $4.1)

If you want a largely hands off owner with a lot of money to burn, Samueli is a better option than Cuban.

1 minute ago, OttoDog said:

Elon Musk to the rescue?

God, I hope not. A man with the temperament of a 5 year old is not capable of exercising the patience it takes to build a winning baseball franchise. Baseball is a grind and teambuilding is, too. 

20 minutes ago, Ace-Of-Diamonds said:

Is all of it quarantined

No. It's Arizona. Nothing is.

On 10/22/2021 at 9:43 AM, eaterfan said:

I can't wait until I can bump this thread again when Kyler signs a contract extension this offseason that pays him more than Mike Trout. 

He made a good choice. 

Someone beat me to the bump. Trout did get more guaranteed money, but Kyler had the higher AAV by 10+ million and his FA again in 5 years. He could sign 2 more bigger contracts than what Trout got.

54 minutes ago, mmc said:

 

Why would ESPN try to void their ACC deal? It's the best deal in sports. It would be like trying to refinance a 30 year mortgage you locked in at 2.8% a couple years ago right now. 

I'm going to need more verification before I buy this one.

Inevitable, but still lame. 

5 minutes ago, Blarg said:

If he moves the team to Monterrey he owns all of Mexico and it's population of 128 million. Mexico would certainly subsidize a new indoor/outdoor stadium which would draw fans from the surrounding areas and create business opportunities. The television rights would have unrestricted reach to the entire country instead of shared revenue between viewership in the OC/LA market. I'm kind of surprised there hasn't been any team nested in Mexico since its an instant fan base. 

He could move to Beijing and have all of China! Over a billion people there.

4 minutes ago, floplag said:

I wonder where the Angels will be playing in '30... 
They just torpedoed Artes master plan, im guessing hes already contacting Vegas or other areas dying for baseball. 
Bravo Ana, when you lose the team, youll know who to blame. 

Arte isn't going anywhere. Orange County has over 3,000,000 people and Las Vegas has 2,000,000. That's before you factor in the IE. The average household income is $94k in OC and $60k in Las Vegas. The TV market is 17 million compared to 2 million. No one in CA gives subsidies for stadiums. Arte isn't going anywhere and the city can't do much with the land. I think they end up with a better deal for the city. One that's not so bad it requires bribing officials to get it through. 

3 minutes ago, Rollinghard said:

We could sell on his mini rebound. 

"Adell is slashing .355/.500/1.032 with five home runs, six doubles, 12 runs, 10 RBI and a stolen base across 40 plate appearances since his demotion to Triple-A Salt Lake on May 3."

I'm not giving up on him, he's still young and has immense talent, but maybe he should change his name to AAAAdell. He always destroys the minors but can't hack it in the bigs right now. 

I haven't followed the minors as closely as I used to...

Can someone explain this to me? How did he last to the 11th round? Was he injured? Is he short? Did he develop more velocity or a new pitch since college? Was he a reliever they stretched out? 

In a more general sense... What's his ceiling? Are we looking at a potential ace, a solid mid-rotation guy, or a back end guy that you're happy to have start a game instead of a bullpen day?

9 hours ago, Tank said:

There’s nothing better than watching the collective disappointment, angst, and bitterness over watching Jets fans react to yet another poor first round pick.

My dad doesn't follow the draft at all. But on Monday he was watching ESPN and they were talking about what the Jets were going to do with their picks. My dad said "The Jets have picks 4 and 10 and will still suck after the draft."

I think they made good picks, but I'm not sold on Wilson being an average or better QB. They can make all the good picks they want, but I think my dad is right.