Skywriting, Billboards and Photobombs

[batmagadanleadoff]

Ceetar wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Do you know that the team from Tampa Bay, competing directly against Bosox and the Yanks has two first place finishes and two second place Wild Card qualifiying finishes in just the last seven seasons? And they did it primarily by spending money to fix mistakes.

No. The Rays are smart, but also relatively poor, so they can't afford to make mistakes. The Mets should be able to afford mistakes. That's the rich team's cushion and it's built into their rich team top percentile payroll.

[Ceetar]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Do you know that the team from Tampa Bay, competing directly against Bosox and the Yanks has two first place finishes and two second place Wild Card qualifiying finishes in just the last seven seasons? And they did it primarily by spending money to fix mistakes. No. The Rays are smart, but also relatively poor, so they can't afford to make mistakes. The Mets should be able to afford mistakes. That's the rich team's cushion and it's built into their rich team top percentile payroll.

Whatever the Mets 'should be' they're not due to sustained losing. The Rays in this situation probably would've had to cut ties with David Wright too. And Murphy, and wouldn't have signed Granderson.

The Mets don't have that revenue stream, right now. They don't, or can't, operate at a loss trying to plug holes with money and get to a point where it's not a loss anymore. They're working to rectify that by making smarter investments over throwing money at it to see what sticks. I'm okay with that plan. You don't have to be, but you not liking that plan, for whatever reason, doesn't mean it's a horrible small-market plan beneath the New York market.

[Guest d'Kong76]

What do we really know about the Mets' revenue stream?

[Ceetar]

d'Kong76 wrote: What do we really know about the Mets' revenue stream?

only what's reported...so nearly nothing. multiple places report how much they lost each of the last few years, but did little digging into what those numbers represent. To me, it seemed like they were reporting just revenue from MLB and fans in/at the park against just payroll. Which only tells you so much.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

d'Kong76 wrote: What do we really know about the Mets' revenue stream?

They reportedly lost $10 million in 2013 on $238M in revenues.
--Attendance and payroll were virtually unchanged in 2014, but all clubs got new boost as a result of new TV contract.

So you figure they still lost something in 2014 but maybe not quite as much. (that is a wild guess tho, could be a lot of expenses in there wrt refinancing, harrassment lawsuits, ticket giveaways etc etc). But it's probably not a lot different than that.

[Ceetar]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: d'Kong76 wrote: What do we really know about the Mets' revenue stream? They reportedly lost $10 million in 2013 on $238M in revenues. --Attendance and payroll were virtually unchanged in 2014, but all clubs got new boost as a result of new TV contract. So you figure they still lost something in 2014 but maybe not quite as much. (that is a wild guess tho, could be a lot of expenses in there wrt refinancing, harrassment lawsuits, ticket giveaways etc etc). But it's probably not a lot different than that.

attendance was about the same and ticket prices didn't really change. There are things like power costs, property taxes, etc too. Raises for Citi Field employees, or layoffs of Citi Field employees. More office employees. You have to figure most of that's negligible though.

But does that include ad revenue? did that go up or down? I presume they got a decent rent check from Amway. Does that include the naming right checks? money from SNY? who knows. Does it include debt payments? interest on those debts?

[Guest Mets Guy in Michigan]

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Again, which big free agent from this year, last year or even the year before did you want them to sign? We are not talking about any specific move. We are talking about having the financial flexibility to take chances and absorb those expenses should they not work out. You can do this with a large payroll. You cannot do this when you have no margin for error. But if you need examples, Nelson Cruz, Jose Abreu, Yasmany Tomas are a few. You could also trade for high-risk contracts like Jose Reyes or Matt Kemp. It also allows you to trade Colon and get the highest return, rather than off-setting his value by asking teams to cover his contract. Again, we are not talking about any specific move, it's about having the flexibility to make multiple moves and absorb the ones that don't work out. Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Foolishly over-spending just to prove you are a big-market team doesn't make sense. No one has proposed this. And changing a thesis to make your position appear stronger is a sure sign that your position is weak. No one has said the Mets should foolishly over-spend. In fact, I've proposed just the opposite. They should wisely spend to the level you'd expect from a franchise playing in the biggest market in the world. And no one is saying that the goal here should be to prove they are a big market team. The goal is to make the team better.

I don't think I changed the thesis at all. The criticism was that the team is cheap because it is not spending a lot of money. My point is that there were not players worth spending a lot of money on becoming available in recent years. And if you are spending money on players who aren't worth it, you're spending it foolishly.

When I asked which players you wanted to spend it on, I'd say Nelson Cruz was a big risk because of PED taint. Abreu appears to be the real deal, but international players with no major league experience are a huge risk and not that many have delivered over time, like Ichiro has. Tomas is a big question mark.

It's not like the Wilpon Mets have never spent on big contacts. Beltran, Pedro, Bay, Santana, the Wright extension were all with these guys. Granderson was a fairly big name and contract.

Does it suck that they helped build a new stadium and got sucked into a Ponzi scheme right as the great recession hit? Absolutely. But it seems like after bottoming out, they're rebuilding the team the right way and not trying to buy a pennant. Even the Yankees are at a point where they are having trouble hiding all their mistakes.

[Edgy MD]

The funny thing is that they were broadly derided as cheap when the payroll was in the top bracket. You spend that much and fall short of the World Series in 2006 and collapse in 2007 and 2008, while still retaining the long-term commitments that you invested in with the expectations of excelling in those seasons and beyond, you're in trouble. This plane was gonna crash whether or not Madoff happened or not, assuming everything breaks the way it did on the field.

Sandy's first year here, they had a $142,797,166 payroll, with loads of money committed to unmovable contracts for players giving him nothing or near to it. Only three teams were reported to have lost money that season --- two of them lost $10 million or less, and the Mets lost around $40 million.

[Ceetar]

well, that plane crash was fairly horrific with just about everyone getting hurt in '09 and even '10. Suddenly the slope on the backend of the mountain became a cliff. And the Mets kept running like Wile E. Coyote before they realized it. (i.e. Jason Bay)

[Centerfield]

I don't think I changed the thesis at all. The criticism was that the team is cheap because it is not spending a lot of money. My point is that there were not players worth spending a lot of money on becoming available in recent years. And if you are spending money on players who aren't worth it, you're spending it foolishly. When I asked which players you wanted to spend it on, I'd say Nelson Cruz was a big risk because of PED taint. Abreu appears to be the real deal, but international players with no major league experience are a huge risk and not that many have delivered over time, like Ichiro has. Tomas is a big question mark.

You just named two players that could have been the difference between making the playoffs, and having another mediocre season. I would venture to say if they had signed Cruz and Abreu, they would have made the playoffs. Those additions add $20 million to the payroll, which would have put them at 14th in the league. Let me repeat that, if you added $20 million to the payroll, they still would have only been 14th in the league. If you invested in Cruz and Abreu, these players were certainly worth this money.

You say they are a huge risk. They are only a huge risk if you are short on money. To the $88 million small market Mets, these players were too risky, and were not options.

To the $118 million big-market Mets (the team I want) these players are, perhaps, worth the risk. And the upside is huge.

The fact of the matter is that there are good buys and bad buys in every off-season. A team with resources can afford to take gambles. Some work out, some don't. But the team with resources is playing.

Let me illustrate this with an example. You have two options prior to the 2014 season:

Option 1: The Mets have 88 Million Dollars. They spend money prudently. They develop their talent. Focus on scouting. They build their team the "right way without trying to buy a pennant".

Option 2: The Mets have 88 Million Dollars. They spend money prudently. They develop their talent. Focus on scouting. They build their team the "right way without trying to buy a pennant". But all of a sudden, they find an extra $30 million dollars. Money they can use to gamble on free agents.

Do you take the extra money and take Option 2? Or do you still stick with Option 1? Only a fool would choose Option 1.

Let's take it one step further. What if, with that extra money, the Mets had invested in Cruz and Abreu. Do you still take Option 1? No. Of course you take Option 2.

Now, instead, of Cruz and Abreu, let's say that the Mets had foolishly given all of the money to Shin Soo Choo (by all means, a bust). Do you take Option 1 or Option 2? You still take Option 2. Because as bad as Choo was, he still would have tied Granderson for the highest OPS among Met outfielders.

In Option 2, you have blown all your money on garbage, leaving you only $88 million to spend wisely. In Option 1, you only have $88 million. But you are no worse off. Even if your gamble goes horribly wrong, you are arguably better than the team with no money to begin with.

It's not like the Wilpon Mets have never spent on big contacts. Beltran, Pedro, Bay, Santana, the Wright extension were all with these guys. Granderson was a fairly big name and contract.

No one ever said the Mets never spent money on big contracts. The criticism was that the Mets should be in a position to spend more.

Does it suck that they helped build a new stadium and got sucked into a Ponzi scheme right as the great recession hit? Absolutely. But it seems like after bottoming out, they're rebuilding the team the right way and not trying to buy a pennant. Even the Yankees are at a point where they are having trouble hiding all their mistakes.

Every club in baseball suffered the same recession. Half of those clubs in the top half have new stadiums. None of that has stopped them from spending money. St. Louis and San Francisco develop talent, spend money, and win. They do not make excuses.

The Mets did not get sucked into a Ponzi scheme. The owners did. And the owners should be capable enough to put a profitable high-payroll team on the field regardless of their personal finances.

None of these are excuses for not increasing the payroll.

It's true that the Yankees are having trouble hiding their mistakes. But this is yet another example of you citing foolish spending to counter my argument for wise spending.

[Ceetar]

The difference of course being that your 118 Mets ARE the 88 Mets if those signings don't work out, which for a third-place mid-70s win team, is quite a gamble.

Are you actually better off with taking a shot and failing? Probably not. What you forget is that now you've got that dead spot on the roster, that it's rare for any team to just cut unless it's real close to the end of their commitment.

With option 2, you still have to spend wisely. It's not free money to gamble with, you should still pick your spots. and sometimes that spot is next year. or via acquiring a player midseason that has a contract.

Not only that, signing Abreu basically means jettisoning Ike DAvis for less, in Spring, because there is nowhere to play him. Duda too probably. So no, you probably don't get the playoffs. Because some of Abreu's production is going to come at the expense of Duda's. Most of it probably. Cruz doesn't hit 40 HR in Citi Field AND probably gives more of it back via defense. Especially over Chris/Eric Young and den Dekker and Nieuwenhuis. (presuming you mean instead of Chris Young)

[Vic Sage]

I had written yet another "rant", but i just deleted it because what's the point.

"Bah, bah, bah".

[Guest d'Kong76]

Don't delete rants! Ranting makes the world go round!

[batmagadanleadoff]

Ceetar wrote: The difference of course being that your 118 Mets ARE the 88 Mets if those signings don't work out, which for a third-place mid-70s win team, is quite a gamble. Are you actually better off with taking a shot and failing? Probably not. What you forget is that now you've got that dead spot on the roster, that it's rare for any team to just cut unless it's real close to the end of their commitment. With option 2, you still have to spend wisely. It's not free money to gamble with, you should still pick your spots. and sometimes that spot is next year. or via acquiring a player midseason that has a contract. Not only that, signing Abreu basically means jettisoning Ike DAvis for less, in Spring, because there is nowhere to play him. Duda too probably. So no, you probably don't get the playoffs. Because some of Abreu's production is going to come at the expense of Duda's. Most of it probably. Cruz doesn't hit 40 HR in Citi Field AND probably gives more of it back via defense. Especially over Chris/Eric Young and den Dekker and Nieuwenhuis. (presuming you mean instead of Chris Young)

Oh, enough already. Stop complicating this with convoluted gibberish! A baseball team with a $125M payroll budget has more options than a team with an $85M budget. And the team with the smaller budget can spend its money unwisely just as easily as its wealthier counterpart can.

Edited December 15, 2014 by Guest

[Centerfield]

d'Kong76 wrote: Don't delete rants! Ranting makes the world go round!

Yeah, for real. I would have read it.

[metirish]

d'Kong76 wrote: Ceetar wrote: I don't really think about them much. They're not even on the 40man. They don't think about you much either. Believe me.

Home run right there , even at Shea

[Guest Mets � Willets Point]

Ah, the annual off-season "Wilpons Must Go!" thread. A comforting Crane Pool holiday tradition.

[Guest d'Kong76]

Ms. Met bless us all! Everyone!

[Vic Sage]

SHOW US THE PLAN... AND HAPPY HOLIDAYS!

[batmagadanleadoff]

One down. Any skywriters out there?

Mets Fan Raising Money For Billboards In Effort To Get Wilpons To Sell Team
December 24, 2014 12:03 PM

[fimg=533]https://cbsnewyork.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/127517148.jpg?w=620&h=349&crop=1[/fimg]
Fans of the New York Mets sit alone in the upper deck during the game against the Cincinnati Reds at Citi Field on September 28, 2011

NEW YORK (CBSNewYork) � It�s no secret that Mets fans have been frustrated with their team�s owners for years and eagerly want the Wilpons to sell. Well owners can�t be fired, but one disgruntled Mets fan is determined to get Fred and Jeff out of Queens. Gary Palumbo, who describes himself as a �long-suffering Mets fan that grew up in Fairfield County and now reside(s) in the great state of NH,� has started a Kickstarter campaign in an effort to make Mets fans� wishes comes true. The title of Palumbo�s page on Kickstarter is entitled �FreeMetsFans Sell The Team! Billboard.� On the page, which you can visit here, Palumbo writes the following: I love the Mets and believe the owners are not responsible stewards of the team. Their poor decisions have placed the team into a position where they no longer invest in a manner of placing the team in contention for the playoffs. They manage the team simply to keep it as a family heirloom. This project is simple, I would like us to create a message and place it on the billboard. Something like: #FreeMetsFans Sell The Team! or #FreeMetsFans New Owners Needed! Two billboards on Roosevelt avenue are currently placed on hold to see if we can raise the funds over the next 30 days. The launch date for them is tentatively scheduled for 03/30/2015 (MLB opening day) and would remain in place for four weeks. Once funding is raised, I would like all of the contributors to recommend a message and we can vote on the best ones along with voting of how the design will look. The money needed is $5000. Renting the two billboards will cost $4000 for 4 weeks. There is a $450 charge to print and install the images onto the boards. The rest of the money will go to cover the Kickstarter commission and production of thank you gifts to the contributors. The main goal for my project is for us to come together with a collective voice and be able to represent our frustration. It�s also about having fun and not being hateful. It�s just a game, BUT I really want the Mets to be better at it with long term continued success. As of Wednesday afternoon, the cause had 48 backers. A sum of $1,159 of the pledged $5,000 goal has been raised. There are 23 days left to donate. During the NFL season, a group of Jets fans raised money for billboards in an attempt to get general manager John Idzik fired.

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/12/24/mets-fan-raising-money-for-billboards-in-effort-to-get-wilpons-to-sell-team/


[fimg=544]https://s3.amazonaws.com/ksr/projects/1537238/photo-1024x768.jpg?1418870901[/fimg]

[Guest d'Kong76]

I'd be shocked if they raised another $3,800... will be fun
to watch the countdown.

Does anyone remember the huge banner in the upper deck
of the Shea seats...Demons be gone, exorcise Shea?

I'm surprised googling there isn't a picture of it somewhere.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Disgruntled Met fans channel their inner wordplay ... conceive and pay for this brilliant billboard:
___________________________

Mets fan pays for anti-ownership billboard, with two more on the way near Citi Field
BY Amara Grautski
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
Published: Wednesday, March 4, 2015, 5:54 PM
Updated: Wednesday, March 4, 2015, 11:17 PM

When one Mets fan reached his breaking point with the team�s ownership group this offseason, he drew inspiration from an unlikely source: Jets fans. Gary Palumbo, 39, followed the success of the �Fire John Idzik� billboards � funded by Gang Green supporters trying to put the team�s GM out of a job � and decided to erect some of his own, aimed at Mets owner Fred Wilpon, president Saul Katz and COO Jeff Wilpon. On Wednesday, along Interstate 95 and about eight miles north of the Mets� spring training home in Port St. Lucie, Fla., a billboard went up with the message �Fred, Jeff & Saul, Ya Gotta Leave.� On April 6, along opposite sides of Roosevelt Ave. in Queens, two more will go up near Citi Field: one with the same message, another with �Fred, Jeff & Saul, Sell the Team.� �You have all these exciting young players coming up,� Palumbo said of the Mets� offseason, �but in my viewpoint, they didn�t do enough to support them.� That was that. Palumbo decided that the Wilpons were �clearly unable� to operate the team properly � a team that hasn�t made the playoffs since 2006. The Connecticut native, who has cheered for the Mets since he was 10 years old, created a Kickstarter campaign with the goal of raising $5,000 to pay for the installation and printing of two anti-ownership billboards near the Queens ballpark. Turns out, there are more than a few fired-up Mets fans: He ended up with $6,700. This billboard is one of two set to go up near Citi Field on April 6. Courtesy of Gary Palumbo This billboard is one of two set to go up near Citi Field on April 6. The additional funds, he said, went toward adding the new signage in Florida. All three billboards will remain up for four weeks. Although the strategy worked for the anti-Idzik segment of Jets fans � he was fired in December � Palumbo realizes that he most likely can�t force out the Wilpons. �You can�t take down a billionaire with a billboard, and if you could, you�d have thousands of them across the U.S.,� he said. He is, however, looking to apply some pressure. �If you have the media here saying one thing, and then a segment of the

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/mets/mets-fan-pays-anti-ownership-billboard-article-1.2137736