Lower Payroll or Creative Accounting?

Yogi44 · 12-15-2006, 11:43 AM

Our payroll has stayed level or dropped the last 3 seasons. Last season we should have recieved the cut for the expansion fee paid for by the Nationals (so late in the year we may still be waiting for the check). That was a few million. Then MLB negoiated a huge TV deal. Each team would be getting a bigger cut than ever. So, if the folks at TW were putting that money towards payroll, we should have seen an increase, correct? So two things could be at play. One, if it is indeed put toward payroll, then we effectively have had another cut in payroll. Two, if it was put back in team revenue, then it just makes the profit more for TW, thus the shareholders.

Either way, we are stuck in the exploding market with being close to a low tier rather than middle tier team (payroll wise). I do not see Liberty Media as changing that.

Lenny · 12-15-2006, 03:10 PM

I'm pretty sure the 06 payrol was higher than the 05 payroll, but I get your point though.

Snowman · 12-15-2006, 05:05 PM

Actually, when Hampton's insurance money and the restructuring of Chipper's and Smoltz' deals are figured in, I think our payroll in '06 was only about $73 million... right about $7 million less than '05.

Lenny · 12-15-2006, 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snowman

Actually, when Hampton's insurance money and the restructuring of Chipper's and Smoltz' deals are figured in, I think our payroll in '06 was only about $73 million... right about $7 million less than '05.

73? I hope your wrong. I was looking at something this morning and I think I remember them saying the Braves final numbers for last year was about 92 mil. So why is there such a big difference? Shouldn't all that stuff already be figured in or was the site I was looking at just wrong?

jpx7 · 12-15-2006, 10:00 PM

Fiscal "creativity" and corporate translucence/murkiness in corporate reporting.

Snowman · 12-15-2006, 10:02 PM

Insurance money isn't subtracted from the official payroll, which is what MLB uses to figure luxury tax, and which is the figure that is published everywhere. Also, they count the full pay of every player on your team towards your salary, even if another team is paying a portion of it.

Snowman · 12-15-2006, 10:11 PM

Dola,

IIRC, the reported amount for Hampton's insurance money was about $12 million, which subtracted from that figure of $92 million would mean we were right around the $80 million to which we are supposed to be limited... so I may have been wrong on the $73 million.

Lenny · 12-16-2006, 02:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snowman

Dola,

IIRC, the reported amount for Hampton's insurance money was about $12 million, which subtracted from that figure of $92 million would mean we were right around the $80 million to which we are supposed to be limited... so I may have been wrong on the $73 million.

Actually now that I take at a look at each players salary I think it might actually be less than 73 million. Acording to ESPN's payroll for each player the total amount was 92,461,852. Boston is paying part of Rentiria's salary, I think about 4 mil, so that would bring that down to about 88,461,852. Like you said above, the insurance paid the team about 12 mil for Hampton, so that brings the number down to about 76,462,852. Then we should have had $6,475,185 sitting in the bank to help offset Hamptons money, so that should actually bring it down to just over 70 million.

How in the world did we become a $70 million team and is this the goal for this year also. This year we will still have the money in the bank to off set Hamptons money, and we still get part of Rentireas money paid by Boston, but we don't have that 12 million insurance money coming in either. This team could actually be trying to get down to 12 mil less than last year.

OK, now things are really starting to get a little scary.

Snowman · 12-16-2006, 02:58 AM

Dammit, I knew I was forgetting something.... the Renteria money. I just couldn't bring it to mind and started doubting my (admittedly poor at times) memory.

But yeah, remember when Stan Kasten left? He made a comment ina single interview that they were planning to eventually cut the payroll down into the $65-70 million range, or something like that. After that single mention, we never heard another word about it, and have been repeatedly told that the $80 million was our payroll for the foreseeable future... no hikes and no more cuts. I'm starting to think Stan was right, and the rest of these *******s in the front office have been lying to us for the past few years.

Lenny · 12-16-2006, 09:51 AM

Well, unless someone can find a flaw in my numbers it looks like last year was around 70 million

Metaphysicist · 12-16-2006, 01:07 PM

I don't think we got 12 million from Hampton's insurance. That seems way too high to me.

Snowman · 12-16-2006, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metaphysicist

I don't think we got 12 million from Hampton's insurance. That seems way too high to me.

The reported (but never officially confirmed) number was 80% of his total salary. That would actually total $11,602,834.40.

Yogi44 · 12-16-2006, 04:10 PM

This is our problem... we as fans have come to expect a certain "something". Well that certain something has escalated beyond our teams means. I'm telling you we are becoming the way of the old Expos teams. Get to the majors, get attached to them and then watch them fly away (either thru trade, free agency or non-tender) because we can't afford them. Which is why JS better tie up McCann and Frenchy in the next coupel of years.

Snowman · 12-16-2006, 04:52 PM

Well, other than the fact that the Expos team means were decided by their market, and ours are being decided by greedy corporate ownership that is more concerned with pocketing profit than with winning, and that is merely pretending they're running this team as a break even venture.

12-15-2006, 11:43 AM	#1 (permalink)
Yogi44 Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: McGee's Crossroads, NC Posts: 253	Lower Payroll or Creative Accounting? Our payroll has stayed level or dropped the last 3 seasons. Last season we should have recieved the cut for the expansion fee paid for by the Nationals (so late in the year we may still be waiting for the check). That was a few million. Then MLB negoiated a huge TV deal. Each team would be getting a bigger cut than ever. So, if the folks at TW were putting that money towards payroll, we should have seen an increase, correct? So two things could be at play. One, if it is indeed put toward payroll, then we effectively have had another cut in payroll. Two, if it was put back in team revenue, then it just makes the profit more for TW, thus the shareholders. Either way, we are stuck in the exploding market with being close to a low tier rather than middle tier team (payroll wise). I do not see Liberty Media as changing that. Last edited by Yogi44; 12-15-2006 at 05:38 PM.

12-15-2006, 05:05 PM	#3 (permalink)
Snowman Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: North Topsail Beach, NC Posts: 1,313	Actually, when Hampton's insurance money and the restructuring of Chipper's and Smoltz' deals are figured in, I think our payroll in '06 was only about $73 million... right about $7 million less than '05. __________________ That corpse you planted last year in your garden, Has it begun to sprout? Will it bloom this year? Or has the sudden frost disturbed its bed? If it wasn't for my horse, I wouldn't have spent that year in college.

12-15-2006, 10:02 PM	#6 (permalink)
Snowman Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: North Topsail Beach, NC Posts: 1,313	Insurance money isn't subtracted from the official payroll, which is what MLB uses to figure luxury tax, and which is the figure that is published everywhere. Also, they count the full pay of every player on your team towards your salary, even if another team is paying a portion of it. __________________ That corpse you planted last year in your garden, Has it begun to sprout? Will it bloom this year? Or has the sudden frost disturbed its bed? If it wasn't for my horse, I wouldn't have spent that year in college.

12-15-2006, 10:11 PM	#7 (permalink)
Snowman Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: North Topsail Beach, NC Posts: 1,313	Dola, IIRC, the reported amount for Hampton's insurance money was about $12 million, which subtracted from that figure of $92 million would mean we were right around the $80 million to which we are supposed to be limited... so I may have been wrong on the $73 million. __________________ That corpse you planted last year in your garden, Has it begun to sprout? Will it bloom this year? Or has the sudden frost disturbed its bed? If it wasn't for my horse, I wouldn't have spent that year in college.

12-16-2006, 02:58 AM	#9 (permalink)
Snowman Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: North Topsail Beach, NC Posts: 1,313	Dammit, I knew I was forgetting something.... the Renteria money. I just couldn't bring it to mind and started doubting my (admittedly poor at times) memory. But yeah, remember when Stan Kasten left? He made a comment ina single interview that they were planning to eventually cut the payroll down into the $65-70 million range, or something like that. After that single mention, we never heard another word about it, and have been repeatedly told that the $80 million was our payroll for the foreseeable future... no hikes and no more cuts. I'm starting to think Stan was right, and the rest of these *******s in the front office have been lying to us for the past few years. __________________ That corpse you planted last year in your garden, Has it begun to sprout? Will it bloom this year? Or has the sudden frost disturbed its bed? If it wasn't for my horse, I wouldn't have spent that year in college.

12-15-2006, 03:10 PM	#2 (permalink)
Lenny Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 240	I'm pretty sure the 06 payrol was higher than the 05 payroll, but I get your point though.

12-15-2006, 10:00 PM	#5 (permalink)
jpx7 Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Chicago Posts: 566	Fiscal "creativity" and corporate translucence/murkiness in corporate reporting.

12-16-2006, 09:51 AM	#10 (permalink)
Lenny Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 240	Well, unless someone can find a flaw in my numbers it looks like last year was around 70 million

12-16-2006, 01:07 PM	#11 (permalink)
Metaphysicist Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Santa Fe, NM Posts: 117	I don't think we got 12 million from Hampton's insurance. That seems way too high to me.

12-16-2006, 04:10 PM	#13 (permalink)
Yogi44 Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: McGee's Crossroads, NC Posts: 253	This is our problem... we as fans have come to expect a certain "something". Well that certain something has escalated beyond our teams means. I'm telling you we are becoming the way of the old Expos teams. Get to the majors, get attached to them and then watch them fly away (either thru trade, free agency or non-tender) because we can't afford them. Which is why JS better tie up McCann and Frenchy in the next coupel of years.

12-16-2006, 04:52 PM	#14 (permalink)
Snowman Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: North Topsail Beach, NC Posts: 1,313	Well, other than the fact that the Expos team means were decided by their market, and ours are being decided by greedy corporate ownership that is more concerned with pocketing profit than with winning, and that is merely pretending they're running this team as a break even venture. __________________ That corpse you planted last year in your garden, Has it begun to sprout? Will it bloom this year? Or has the sudden frost disturbed its bed? If it wasn't for my horse, I wouldn't have spent that year in college.