Maxman Posted February 21, 2013 Share Posted February 21, 2013 The good thing about a new GM is he can be pretty ruthless when it comes to redoing these deals. I don't know the particulars of the Holmes and Harris contracts. But he didn't give them out. So he can play hardball. He would be able to cut them (cap ramifications aside) because it wasn't his idea to sign them to those deals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slats Posted February 21, 2013 Share Posted February 21, 2013 I put myself in the players shoes. If my job pays me 12,000 a year. And instead of give me 12 monthly payments of a 1000, they give it all up front. How is that any better? The time value of money is basically nothing because the interest rates are zero. You're probably the only person who doesn't understand that $8M today beats the hell out of $8M spread out over September thru January. I'm sure Mark and his advisors understand the benefits, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrishJets39 Posted February 21, 2013 Share Posted February 21, 2013 Would love to have Revis back it won't be easy to replace him. But if the Jets can get some picks and a quality player that can come in and start right away then I'm for it. I'm hoping Jets can get a 1st Rd for Revis if not a least a 2nd and a 3rd or 4th Rd's and a 2nd for the 2014 drafts. Can't wait till the 12th and the 15 to see what going to happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faba Posted February 21, 2013 Share Posted February 21, 2013 As someone I think Bleedin Green said 1 million bonus is chump change- that is not a hard decision deadline Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bitonti Posted February 21, 2013 Share Posted February 21, 2013 You're probably the only person who doesn't understand that $8M today beats the hell out of $8M spread out over September thru January. I'm sure Mark and his advisors understand the benefits, Because of the implied investment gains? there's implied investment losses too. with interest rates so low it's a marginal benefit at best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted February 21, 2013 Share Posted February 21, 2013 Because of the implied investment gains? there's implied investment losses too. with interest rates so low it's a marginal benefit at best. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS IMPLIED INVESTMENT LOSSES. He can put the money in a shoe box under his bed and be in the same position. You sound like a guy ready to take a dollar a day for 1,000 years instead of $365,000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bitonti Posted February 21, 2013 Share Posted February 21, 2013 Ok so let's break this down fellas. Scenario 1 Mark gets 8.5 Mil over the course of 16 game checks from Sep-Dec in 2013. Scenario 2 Mark gets 8.5 Mil up front in August. in scenario 1 the 1% interest is 85000 per year. But the Jets aren't giving it to him a year in advance. In fact he's getting 1/16th of it in first week of Sept. either way. Then he gets a week interest on week 2's check, 2 week's interest on week 3's check etc. let's forget all that and pro rate the interest on the whole 8.5 as 1% over 6 months = $42500. that's being really generous and the guaranteed difference between the scenarios. Mark could by 30 year T bills in which case whether he's getting it in weekly installments or 1 lump sum doesn't really matter. we could pretend that mark can invest the whole chunk in the stock market, and maybe make 5% on it by the end of the year (which would be amazing). but that is not guaranteed. He could lose it all. there's fees, commissions, taxes etc. Only the 1% savings rate is 100% guarunteeed But Mark also could be cut or traded in this scenario. He could get traded to some backwater he's got no interest in... like Jacksonville or Buffalo. There's the lost cost in local sponsorships. There's moving expenses. There's the price of getting his current house ready for sale. there's the chance that the house he bought in 2008 isn't worth what he paid for it at the time. so in the end what is this player gaining? I don't see it as an advantage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted February 21, 2013 Share Posted February 21, 2013 Heaven help us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFtoLong Posted February 21, 2013 Share Posted February 21, 2013 Bit, sorry man, no matter how you slice this, you are wrong, money now is absolutely, without a doubt, better than tomorrow. Present value calculations prove this out very, very clearly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bitonti Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 Bit, sorry man, no matter how you slice this, you are wrong, money now is absolutely, without a doubt, better than tomorrow. Present value calculations prove this out very, very clearly the NBA offers to pay it's players seasonally or weekly. 3 out of 4 players take weekly. There has to be a reason for that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.