The New Mets Finances Thread - v.2012 Offseason

[Edgy MD]

The Second Spitter wrote: The fact the Wilpon's used the club as a vehicle for their passive investments speaks volumes as to where their priorities reside.

Can you explain this at greater length. I don't follow "vehicle for their passive investments.... ."

[bmfc1]

What Second Spitter is saying is that the Wilpons are using the Mets and SNY solely to reestablish their personal wealth, lost in large part by their investments with Madoff. They are not using (as of this writing) any of the money they gain by financing, refinancing, taking out loans, and accepting loans from Major League Baseball, all in the name of the New York Mets other than to do what is absolutely necessary for the Mets--which is the minimum that they have to do. They are the only major league team not to sign a major league free agent. They are so ineptly run that they didn't trade Scott Hairston last summer and now it appears that they can't afford to resign him because he would like to have a two-year deal. To the Wilpons, the Mets are an apartment building, an office building, and nothing more. If they can cut back on the cleaning crew and have elevators skip floors to save money, they will do so. They don't care or understand that a sports team is a public trust and they have abdicated their responsibilities as the care-takers of the Mets franchise. Perhaps Sandy Alderson is playing "possum" and will sign Michael Bourn and/or Kyle Loshe at reduced rates. More realistically, perhaps he will sign Austin Kearns and/or Joe Saunders. But right now, with spring training another day closer, he hasn't which may mean that he is not empowered to do so by the Wilpons despite the recent influx of money... and that is what Second Spitter was saying. It is possible that this is part of a plan that means in 2015 and 200 or so losses later, they will have money to spend and some will say "see!" but for now, the continued ownership of the Mets by the Wilpon family is a disaster for Mets fans and if Bud Selig had a brain in his feeble head, a terrible problem and embarrassment for Major League Baseball.

[Edgy MD]

Second Spitter, does that correctly characterize your statement?

[Guest Swan Swan H]

Oh. When he said 'vehicle for passive investments' I thought he meant this:

[Ceetar]

I'm not sure when everyone started thinking Scott Hairston was Justin Upton, but they've already signed a bunch of guys with at least a passing chance of equating what Hairston did/is worth for a fraction of the price.

[ashie62]

I would say the Wilpons treat the Mets as an apartment building and the fans as tenants...

[bmfc1]

Ceetar wrote: I'm not sure when everyone started thinking Scott Hairston was Justin Upton, but they've already signed a bunch of guys with at least a passing chance of equating what Hairston did/is worth for a fraction of the price.

Maybe Bixler, Gowgill and Brown will... but we know what Hairston can do so, to me, that would be a better choice for a team trying to win. I prefer another option than Hairston with his bad fielding and struggling against RHP but I'd rather have him than "a passing chance."

[ashie62]

I'm on your side here.

Baxter, Cowgill, Brown are almost faceless interchangeable fringe major and or minor leaguers...

We are not going to get a player better than Hairston in 2013 for the OF and at this point I doubt the Mets will "splurge" for him.

Regarding Mike Baxter, I do not understand the love he seems to get here. He made a great catch and he is from Flushing. Thats really about it and at his age the ceiling most likely has been touched.

Maybe the pursestrings loosen in 2014, I hope...

[batmagadanleadoff]

Ceetar wrote: I'm not sure when everyone started thinking Scott Hairston was Justin Upton, but they've already signed a bunch of guys with at least a passing chance of equating what Hairston did/is worth for a fraction of the price.

[Ceetar]

some of it may be dumpster diving, some of it may be selling guys that simply don't sell jeans.

[bmfc1]

Ashie62 wrote: I would say the Wilpons treat the Mets as an apartment building and the fans as tenants...

Great line. The problem is that we are tenants in perpetuity.

[Guest The Second Spitter]

Edgy MD wrote: Second Spitter, does that correctly characterize your statement?

Something like that. In addition, the Mets and Cyclones were both named as defendants in Picard's lawsuit. There was an implication they were using money from baseball operations to invest with Uncle Bernie. I don't have a copy of the lawsuit handy; perhaps bmlo does. I also seem to recall some discussion surrounding Bonilla's buyout being invested in such a way.

[bmfc1]

The Second Spitter wrote: perhaps bmlo does. I also seem to recall some discussion surrounding Bonilla's buyout being invested in such a way.

"bmlo" doesn't but remember it as you do.

[Edgy MD]

The Second Spitter wrote: Edgy MD wrote: Second Spitter, does that correctly characterize your statement? Something like that. In addition, the Mets and Cyclones were both named as defendants in Picard's lawsuit. There was an implication they were using money from baseball operations to invest with Uncle Bernie. I don't have a copy of the lawsuit handy; perhaps bmlo does. I also seem to recall some discussion surrounding Bonilla's buyout being invested in such a way.

It seems clear to me that they were using money from their investments to support baseball operations.

[duan]

Edgy MD wrote: Edgy MD wrote: Second Spitter, does that correctly characterize your statement? Something like that. In addition, the Mets and Cyclones were both named as defendants in Picard's lawsuit. There was an implication they were using money from baseball operations to invest with Uncle Bernie. I don't have a copy of the lawsuit handy; perhaps bmlo does. I also seem to recall some discussion surrounding Bonilla's buyout being invested in such a way. It seems clear to me that they were using money from their investments to support baseball operations.

I think edgy's point is totally on the money. The one caveat I'd have is that one of those investments (SNY) may have substantially benefited from below market price deal on the rights to the Mets games and that may be why the losses sustained in actual mets (which they have subsidised until the point when they had no working capital to do so) are higher then they should be.

You'd have to step back and look at the real structure of the inter-company/related party transactions to genuinely unpick the SNY/Mets/Citifield revenue/costs.

[stevejrogers]

Still the offseason technically.

The hits just keep coming...

http://wagehourlaw.foxrothschild.com/2011/08/articles/class-actions/a-losing-record-and-now-this-citi-field-security-guards-sue-the-new-york-mets-for-overtime-pay/

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Not for nothing but these wage-and-hour lawsuits are pretty common for large employers. I'd be shocked if this turned into anything.

[Ceetar]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Not for nothing but these wage-and-hour lawsuits are pretty common for large employers. I'd be shocked if this turned into anything.

either last year or the year before the Yankee Stadium security firm was suing them I believe. Mostly drop in the bucket stuff at worst I imagine.

related to lawsuits but probably not finances, the Mets apparently won a lawsuit keeping the Kosher stands from opening on Friday nights and Saturdays.

[ashie62]

$17 an hour is not bad for a job that requires zero education.

[stevejrogers]

OH FUCK ME

Posted on August 10, 2011 by Keith Reinfeld A Losing Record And Now This --- Citi Field Security Guards Sue The New York Mets for Overtime Pay

Actually fuck the Wilpon hating troll on another forum that posted that link as if it was the news of the day...

Read more...post less...