Bugg Posted December 27, 2008 Share Posted December 27, 2008 There are going to be changes, folks. The Times bought into that Fenway as a jewel BS-which is in part is the attitude which led to their bond rating now being junk. The Times has aways assumed being the New York Times meant something, and in the era of the net, nobody cares much about that. Not written in stone, but to be more profitable a new Fenway is much more of a prospective moneymaker than the current craphole, and it might not be easy with ths awful economy. Welcome to the 21st century. Note a few things might make this sale harder, having spoken to people involved with 2 of the local franchises below. The Jets, and Giants PSL thing is turning into an embarrassment and fiasco;the Mets and Yankees are having trouble selling high end tickets and luxury boxes(in fact if you go to any local sporting events, notice that a lot of luxury boxes are empty); the Nets' Brooklyn arena is not going to happen any time soon, with the architect, Frank Gehry, laying off his staff working on a cut back redesign of the project(already scaled back several times as the market for NYC luxury houseing evaporates with dissappearing Wall Street jobs) after Forest City Ratner stopped payng him. The Times will make money selling their stake, but it might not be a moneymaker longterm for the new owner. And the Couposn of Flushing are a whole lot poorer than anyone knew. All the economic assumptions that underlaid all these projects have pretty much been cracked, broken, destroyed. Owning a sports franchise is not quite the golden goose it was but a short time ago. http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5g4l9mur5rccivJ2zT-F4tONPtwwA NY Times seeking to sell Boston Red Sox stake: reports 6 hours ago WASHINGTON (AFP) — The New York Times Co., strapped for cash and facing shrinking revenue, is reportedly seeking to sell its stake in the Boston Red Sox baseball team. The New York Times newspaper, citing "a person briefed on the plans," reported this week that the Times Co. is "actively shopping" the company's 17.5 percent stake in New England Sports Ventures (NESV), which owns the Red Sox. Besides the popular Major League baseball team, NESV also owns their iconic stadium, Fenway Park, and 80 percent of the cable television channel which airs their games, the New England Sports Network. The Times purchased the stake in 2002 for 75 million dollars. Citing "two people familiar with the discussions," The Wall Street Journal reported on Friday that the Times had indicated its willingness to sell at a meeting of NESV's limited partners last month. The newspaper said Barclays Capital has pegged the value of the stake at about 166 million dollars. The Journal said the Times was seeking 300 million dollars for the stake in the Red Sox, one of the most valuable teams in the Major Leagues after winning the World Series twice since 2004. Besides the flagship New York Times, the New York Times Co. also owns the International Herald Tribune, The Boston Globe, 16 other daily newspapers and other properties. The Times has not been spared the crisis gripping the US newspaper industry and reported this week that both print and online advertising revenue dropped in November. The Times said total company revenue fell 13.9 percent in November compared with the same month a year ago while advertising revenue was down 20.9 percent. The company also has a 400-million-dollar revolving line of credit set to expire in May and it announced earlier this month that it will borrow as much as 225 million dollars against its new headquarters building in Manhattan. Standard & Poor's recently downgraded the credit rating on the Times Co. to below investment grade, and Moody's Investors Service has said it may do the same. Times Co. stock has lost more than half its value this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugg Posted December 28, 2008 Author Share Posted December 28, 2008 even in Da Bronx. Know that the luxury boxes and high end season tickets are not selling the way they thought they would- PAYROLL $QUEEZE RISING COSTS HITTING YANKS' BOTTOM LINE By HOLLY M. SANDERS Click image to enlarge. Last updated: 2:34 am December 28, 2008 Posted: 1:42 am December 28, 2008 The New York Yankees' decision to commit more than $400 million to high-priced free agents has some fans wondering how the team can continue to bankroll its expensive roster and fancy ballpark without drowning in red ink. The Yankees rake in an estimated $400 million in revenue a year. The single-biggest source of revenue is ticket sales. Last season, 4.2 million fans packed the stands. Assume $55 a ticket, and that comes out to $230 million. The team also gets between $65 million and $75 million in rights fees from its share of the YES Network, and a similar amount from sponsorships and advertisers. But while the Yankees generate a lot of cash, they also spend it. The team has the biggest payroll in baseball, with $223 million in players' salaries. The franchise pays about one-third of its revenue - a whopping $100 million - to Major League Baseball under the league's revenue-sharing calculations. Other expenses, such as travel, training and maintenance, also eat into the bottom line. Suddenly, it seems like the Yankees aren't playing "money ball." Forbes estimated that the baseball team posted a $47 million operating loss in the 2007 season. In calculating the team's finances, however, there's always some degree of confusion. That's because the baseball team is a division of Yankees Global Enterprises, a private holding company with assets and stakes in other businesses. So the holding company may be operating at a profit even if the team is not. Regardless, the Yankees just spent big on two pitchers: A.J. Burnett and CC Sabathia. The team continued its spending spree with a $180 million deal for first baseman Mark Teixeira. The Yankees were able to afford much of that new payroll by shedding between $80 million and $90 million in high-priced players, including Bobby Abreu, Jason Giambi, Mike Mussina and Andy Pettitte. Pettitte may stay with the team under a cheaper contract. Considering that the new contracts are spread out over eight years, the Yankees' payroll for the 2009 season should be $20 million or $30 million less than 2008. "They are not recession-proof," said Marc Ganis, president of Sportscorp, a prominent sports-consulting firm in Chicago. "The reason why this works is because they're dropping $85 million from their payroll." Still, there's that $1.3 billion new stadium. The Yankees caused a stir this year when they asked the city to help raise an additional $259 million in tax-free financing to finish the project on time, as well as $111 million in more conventional debt. The team is already on the hook for about $1 billion in bonds to build the stadium. While it seems like bad timing, there are a couple of reasons why the Yankees believe their baseball economics work. The team is banking that the new ballpark will bring in more revenue than the old one did. There will be 51 luxury-box suites in the new stadium priced between $600,000 and $850,000, up from 19 at the old ballpark. The new stadium also gives the team a huge break on MLB revenue sharing. MLB allows teams that build new stadiums to deduct costs, including debt payments, from its calculations. The Yankees will have $60 million in debt payments and $25 million in stadium-related costs - all deductible from its $100 million in revenue-sharing payments. Between the deductions and new stadium revenue, the Yankees figure they can afford their huge payroll. There are risks, however. The weak economy will make it tougher for the team to borrow money down the line, while there may be less cash from corporate sponsors and fewer buyers for ever-rising ticket prices. "There are many people who are saying in this economic climate and with the banking industry being frozen, that this is irresponsible," said Ganis. "It probably would be for any other team." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PFSIKH Posted December 28, 2008 Share Posted December 28, 2008 Payroll squeeze? How can you title an article with payroll squeeze when you have the following information: The new stadium also gives the team a huge break on MLB revenue sharing. MLB allows teams that build new stadiums to deduct costs, including debt payments, from its calculations. The Yankees will have $60 million in debt payments and $25 million in stadium-related costs - all deductible from its $100 million in revenue-sharing payments. Even assuming those numbers are right, but they are not, the Skanks are relieved of 85 million in payments. Boo Hoo. With the NYC government picking up more and more of the tab, the Skanks are further relieved of that 'burden' of the new stadium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NIGHT STALKER Posted December 28, 2008 Share Posted December 28, 2008 Payroll squeeze? How can you title an article with payroll squeeze when you have the following information: Even assuming those numbers are right, but they are not, the Skanks are relieved of 85 million in payments. Boo Hoo. With the NYC government picking up more and more of the tab, the Skanks are further relieved of that 'burden' of the new stadium. PFSIKH, you seem to post more about the best sports franchise in all of sports than your Sux...why is that? Don't be concerned about the Yanks, tell us about your team because I sure don't post anything about them...good or bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugg Posted December 28, 2008 Author Share Posted December 28, 2008 The one thing they do not take into account-the YES Network is part of a private holding company. What ever payments they make to the Yankees for rights, or from the Yankees to YES, aren't readily disclosed. Which is no small reason the Yanks left MSG and started YES. As such, they don't have to disclose how much ad revenue YES makes. And that is as much a revenue stream to the Yankees as anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackout Posted December 28, 2008 Share Posted December 28, 2008 the sky ain't fallin yanks will be fine...unless they get less than 60 wins lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anskyruben Posted December 28, 2008 Share Posted December 28, 2008 Anyone who thinks the Yankees will be hurting for money is nuts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackout Posted December 28, 2008 Share Posted December 28, 2008 Anyone who thinks the Yankees will be hurting for money is nuts. all you need to see is who posted the story and you know it's just wishful thinking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PFSIKH Posted December 28, 2008 Share Posted December 28, 2008 PFSIKH, you seem to post more about the best sports franchise in all of sports than your Sux...why is that? Don't be concerned about the Yanks, tell us about your team because I sure don't post anything about them...good or bad. Really? This thread is about them and you posted in it. When all the threads are about them, it is kind of tough to talk about the Sox. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackout Posted December 28, 2008 Share Posted December 28, 2008 it says "league revenue sharing: 100 mil" that was less than 30 mil! BS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.