Yu Darvish- Posting fee?

[Yankee Fan in Boston]

Better is still to be determined. Younger is no contest. Cheaper...CC's price was already set. ~hat will Darvish cost in 2017? Only time will tell.

Who is the ML proven ace and rotation anchor?

Wow, yeah. Let's not get ahead of ourselves

[BobLoblaw]

Did your parents buy you everything you wanted when you were growing up just because they could afford it? If not, that must mean they didn't care.

Most spoiled fanbase ever.

Getting Darvish would have been a good move, its not spoiled to want your team to make a good move they are able to make.

[Big_E]

Getting Darvish would have been a good move, its not spoiled to want your team to make a good move they are able to make.

Darvish could be the next Randy Johnson.


Or he could be the next Dice-K, Irabu, Igawa.

LITTLE early to tell...

[effdamets]

Getting Darvish would have been a good move, its not spoiled to want your team to make a good move they are able to make.

Are you sure that the Yankees were "able to make the move"?

I think that is what Mr Coffee was getting at. Believing that the Yankees' supply of money is never ending is where most fans go wrong.

[Mr Coffee]

Getting Darvish would have been a good move, its not spoiled to want your team to make a good move they are able to make.

They are not going to make every single move they can just because they can. Darvish is still an unknown quantity despite his win vs the Yankees last night and $120M is still a lot of money, especially given the past track record the Yankees have with regard to Japanese pitchers.

Besides, I thought the current talking point was that the Yankees ruin every pitcher they acquire anyway...

[GordonGecko]

Did your parents buy you everything you wanted when you were growing up just because they could afford it? If not, that must mean they didn't care.

Most spoiled fanbase ever.

You're completely off on this one. The Yankees are a business, not parents who want the best for their kids. They are charging the maximum possible prices they can and raking in huge profits. In the past, George Steinbrenner would plow the vast majority of that money intro free agents and putting the very best possible team on the field money could buy.

If the Yankees aren't going to do that and instead pocket a much larger % of net income, then they simply can't justify the premiums they are charging for their brand.

[Yankee Fan in Boston]

You're completely off on this one. The Yankees are a business, not parents who want the best for their kids. They are charging the maximum possible prices they can and raking in huge profits. In the past, George Steinbrenner would plow the vast majority of that money intro free agents and putting the very best possible team on the field money could buy.

If the Yankees aren't going to do that and instead pocket a much larger % of net income, then they simply can't justify the premiums they are charging for their brand.

Do we actually know that the current ownership is pocketing a larger percentage of revenue? George made a ton on the Yankees. Besides, the quality of the team probably isn't best measured by payroll. A lot of money has been unwisely spent over the past 25 years in the Bronx.

Besides all that, you kind of undermine your own post at the end. They can justify charging whatever they want as long as they continue to profit. Their profits justify their prices, not their spending.

[BobLoblaw]

Are you sure that the Yankees were "able to make the move"?

I think that is what Mr Coffee was getting at. Believing that the Yankees' supply of money is never ending is where most fans go wrong.

I'm not drinking the Kool Aid that the Yankees all of a sudden need to start watching their budget. Guess we will just agree to disagree on this one.

Also, its not just that they didn't get him. Its that they didn't even try, their bid was a joke.

[LIYanks]

Do we actually know that the current ownership is pocketing a larger percentage of revenue? George made a ton on the Yankees. Besides, the quality of the team probably isn't best measured by payroll. A lot of money has been unwisely spent over the past 25 years in the Bronx

George's passing marked a watershed in the spending pattern of New York Yankees. Much to the chagrin of us oldtimers, this newly found fiduciary responsibility at the FO removed the best part of being a Yankee fan - a feeling of overindulgence and entitlement.

To corporate America, greed is good. I am happy for the Steinbrenner family that NYY is producing prodigious revenue. I can understand if they don't want to afford us Darvish. I do have the right to say WTF.

[teknetic]

Luxury tax?
CC will be making $23 million per year through 2015 and then $25 million in 2016.
Darvish will be making $10 million per year from 2013-2016.

Who is better, younger, and cheaper?

Holy ish, did you just claim Darvish is better than a guy who has a 27 WAR (good for third in the majors) since 2008?

[Yankee Fan in Boston]

George's passing marked a watershed in the spending pattern of New York Yankees. Much to the chagrin of us oldtimers, this newly found fiduciary responsibility at the FO removed the best part of being a Yankee fan - a feeling of overindulgence and entitlement.

To corporate America, greed is good. I am happy for the Steinbrenner family that NYY is producing prodigious revenue. I can understand if they don't want to afford us Darvish. I do have the right to say WTF.

Given George's tendencies, after the Irabu and Igawa disasters, I tend to think he wouldn't have gone after Darvish anyway

[False1]

You're completely off on this one. The Yankees are a business, not parents who want the best for their kids. They are charging the maximum possible prices they can and raking in huge profits. In the past, George Steinbrenner would plow the vast majority of that money intro free agents and putting the very best possible team on the field money could buy.

If the Yankees aren't going to do that and instead pocket a much larger % of net income, then they simply can't justify the premiums they are charging for their brand.

I don't think the analogy was meant to be taken literally, but if you can't see that dropping $57MM up front, and then locking into a contract that could be worth 6/$60MM without significant DL time is a giant gamble for a franchise that is already well over the prescribed spending threshold, I don't know what to tell you. If he's not an ace for the duration of that deal, it would limit even a rich franchise that is already spending at these levels.

I think the "George would have spent the money" line is not something that can be backed factually. I mean, what payroll do you think he would have gone too if he was still running the team? Instead of trying to get down to $189MM, you think he would have gone up to $250MM? $300MM?

I have no issues whatsoever with the team I root for not getting the big fish (especially an unproven one) every offseason just because the larger fan base thinks they "can" due to a perception of some bottomless pit of cash. You're making it sound like they're behaving like cheapskates, which is inaccurate.

[effdamets]

I'm not drinking the Kool Aid that the Yankees all of a sudden need to start watching their budget. Guess we will just agree to disagree on this one.

Also, its not just that they didn't get him. Its that they didn't even try, their bid was a joke.

No one is saying anything about any kool aid... At least I'm not.
But as fans, we're EXTEMELY removed from what the Yankees can and cannot afford. Nor do we know what they want to do in terms of financial responsibility.

GSIII was a personality that didn't care about anything or anyone else. No matter the luxury tax implications, George wanted to say eff you to everyone.

This regime, the sons, well maybe they don't want to feed the bottom teams. Make them struggle. In turn, it puts more money in their own pockets.
You cannot ever blame them for wanting to make more money. Never.

Darvish was risky. He still is. It's much too early to tell.

[GordonGecko]

I don't think the analogy was meant to be taken literally, but if you can't see that dropping $57MM up front, and then locking into a contract that could be worth 6/$60MM without significant DL time is a giant gamble for a franchise that is already well over the prescribed spending threshold, I don't know what to tell you. If he's not an ace for the duration of that deal, it would limit even a rich franchise that is already spending at these levels.

I think the "George would have spent the money" line is not something that can be backed factually. I mean, what payroll do you think he would have gone too if he was still running the team? Instead of trying to get down to $189MM, you think he would have gone up to $250MM? $300MM?

I have no issues whatsoever with the team I root for not getting the big fish (especially an unproven one) every offseason just because the larger fan base thinks they "can" due to a perception of some bottomless pit of cash. You're making it sound like they're behaving like cheapskates, which is inaccurate.

My issue is not specifically with this deal, but in the general with the Yankees new found austerity. The "prescribed spending threshold" you speak of is the main problem here. It's bogus. The Yankees are setting that number (roughly 200M payroll) in order to break even on baseball operations. That masks the fact that their TV rights are worth most likely well over $200M to YES in additional revenue from which this current Yankees ownership pockets all net income after expenses and payments to Goldman Sachs.

[False1]

My issue is not specifically with this deal, but in the general with the Yankees new found austerity. The "prescribed spending threshold" you speak of is the main problem here. It's bogus. The Yankees are setting that number (roughly 200M payroll) in order to break even on baseball operations. That masks the fact that their TV rights are worth most likely well over $200M to YES in additional revenue from which this current Yankees ownership pockets all net income after expenses and payments to Goldman Sachs.

Sorry, I have a hard time blaming the ownership for not wanting to pay a 50% tax for every dollar spent over the threshold, particularly if they are the only team doing it and are still a WS contender.

If they start putting a materially inferior product on the field, or if prices continue to increase, then I'd say there's reason for concern. But some financial responsibility is not something I'm going to castrate them for as a fan.

[awy]

Which is crap because the Yankees may be just above breaking even on baseball operations but are printing a mint on the YES network with many tens of millions $$$ in pure profit. They should be plowing that money back into the team, but we all know George isn't running the show anymore. That TV contract is worth at least $150M per year (based on Anaheim Angels TV contract), and more like north of $250M based on what they can charge for ads in NYC metro and the cable carriage fees they extorted

business skool tells you that you should only reinvest to gain marginal revenue > what you put in. if the yankees can sell YES in japan then ................ yes he would be here but i don't think they can.

[Yankee Fan in Boston]

business skool tells you that you should only reinvest to gain marginal revenue > what you put in. if the yankees can sell YES in japan then ................ yes he would be here but i don't think they can.

You're right, they can't. Would be far more interesting if they could

[grizy]

My issue is not specifically with this deal, but in the general with the Yankees new found austerity. The "prescribed spending threshold" you speak of is the main problem here. It's bogus. The Yankees are setting that number (roughly 200M payroll) in order to break even on baseball operations. That masks the fact that their TV rights are worth most likely well over $200M to YES in additional revenue from which this current Yankees ownership pockets all net income after expenses and payments to Goldman Sachs.

Judging by the commercials we get to see on YES, I find it extremely unlikely the broadcasting rights are worth 200m, not to the Yankees anyway.

Estimates for annual YES revenues range from about 350 to 400 million and the Yankees, according to Fortune, owns only an estimated 36%.

That doesn't leave anything close to even 100m after expenses, even if you were to run YES as a zero profit organization and get rest of their programming for free (they have to pay, for example, the Nets)

[Mr Coffee]

You're completely off on this one. The Yankees are a business, not parents who want the best for their kids. They are charging the maximum possible prices they can and raking in huge profits. In the past, George Steinbrenner would plow the vast majority of that money intro free agents and putting the very best possible team on the field money could buy.

If the Yankees aren't going to do that and instead pocket a much larger % of net income, then they simply can't justify the premiums they are charging for their brand.

Let's say that they are at the maximum they can charge (given the amount of empty seats, some might say they are past it, but whatever). Let's also say that with all their combined revenue minus expenses, they are able to field a team with a $500M payroll each year.

Should they?

[GordonGecko]

business skool tells you that you should only reinvest to gain marginal revenue > what you put in.

Or to maintain your current revenue, which has recently been sliding and will only get worse.

[GordonGecko]

Judging by the commercials we get to see on YES, I find it extremely unlikely the broadcasting rights are worth 200m, not to the Yankees anyway.

The benchmark is the second team in the greater LA metro area, the Angels. Their new 20 year deal is worth $150M/year. You just take it from there by placing X% more value on Yankees broadcast rights by virtue of being the primary team in the NYC market where everything is substantially more expensive

[awy]

Or to maintain your current revenue, which has recently been sliding and will only get worse.

that might be because of the economy. the team is doing pretty well, though i think people would pay to see darvish

[Yankee Fan in Boston]

Or to maintain your current revenue, which has recently been sliding and will only get worse.

Has their overall revenue (including income from YES) actually decreased (not just for the Yankees, but their holding company)? More importantly, has their profit?

[Mr Coffee]

Or to maintain your current revenue, which has recently been sliding and will only get worse.

I'm not sure that is true-- link?

And if it is true that they have made less revenue I'd guess it had more to do with overpricing than anything else, given that they have made the playoffs just about every year for more than a decade and a half.

[False1]

Or to maintain your current revenue, which has recently been sliding and will only get worse.

What else can you see in your crystal ball? Why will it only get worse?