batmagadanleadoff

Mets Owners May Pay Themselves Big Dividend While Team's Fans Suffer Mike Ozanian, Forbes Staff Taking advantage of low interest rates and the escalating value of regional sports networks, the owners of the New York Mets are working with bankers to move debt from their baseball team to their cable network and pay themselves a dividend in the process, according to the New York Times. The Mets have lost roughly $100 million over the past two seasons because of falling attendance and high debt payments. The team�s owners, Fred Wilpon and Saul Katz, leveraged the Mets and the cable network they own two-thords of (Comcast and Time Warner Cable own the remainder), SportsNet New York, to the hilt. For years the two men relied on fake profits from Ponzi schemer Bernie Madoff to backstop their finances. But when Madoff was exposed as a fraud, the Mets lost their ATM. Last year the team reduced their payroll by $50 million before this season and it showed on the diamond, finishing 74-88, 24 games behind the first place Washington Nationals. The Mets drew 2.24 million fans at Citi Field this season, 17th among MLB�s 30 teams and over 100,000 less than they drew in 2011, despite lowering ticket prices significantly for many seats. Wilpon and Kats are looking to refinance the $450 million of debt on SNY to pay down down some of the baseball team�s roughly $480 million of debt, and perhaps pay themselves a dividend with some of the proceeds from the refinancing. This should not come as a surprise as the team�s owners piled on debt to pay themselves a dividend in the past. The shifting of debt from the team to SNY�s is a no-brainer, given the cable channel�s value, now about $2 billion, has increased the past few years while the value of the Mets, $719 million, fell 4% over the past year. The more valuable asset that is appreciating in value can borrow more at a more favorable interest rate than the less valuable asset that is falling in value. The real hope for Mets fans is that the team�s owners will not forget their long-suffering fans and also use some of the proceeds from the refinancing to boost payroll and put a better product on the field. http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2012/10/06/mets-owners-may-pay-themselves-big-dividend-while-teams-fans-suffer/

El Sidney.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: But that's just it-- if he hasn't made the call on this particular ball by that point, he really can't; the ball has drifted 50 feet or so into the infield [sic] , and the SS has run/backpedaled that distance OUT of position to reach it. Both of those are essentially counter to the rule, which specifies "ordinary effort" for an infielder (which, in practice, has always been interpreted as something like "easy play within the regular positional territory of the infielder"). Had he made the call earlier, and the ball merely drifted that far AFTER the call was made, it would be more understandable. The issue, IOW, is not just that a call that should be made early was made late, it's that THAT particular call was made once a number of infield-fly-eliminating determinants had already come into existence. Yeah. What he said. Word for word. Except for one.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Seaver. Are you sure about that? Jesse Orosco!

Ceetar wrote: Oliver Perez. List. Tarnished.

SteveJRogers wrote: Yup, yup, yup and yup. So I'm not ripping off Mag's idea completely, I'm just going to put the names, and number of times hitting the 15 win plateau. R.A. Dickey 2012 (20) Johan Santana 2008 (16) Rick Reed 1998 (16) Mike Hampton 1999 (15) Mike Pelfrey 2010 (15) Rip me off. Please. I like pictures.

Big Pelf

Rick Reed.

SteveJRogers wrote: seawolf17 wrote: I specifically pick a non-ugly KMac card and you give me that. I'm still kinda bitter that he never signed a Topps contract until he got here. I want to have Topps go back and make retro cards from 1983-1987 in Padres uniforms for me. (Someone get me a Photoshop expert.) I want to say it may have been done for their Fan Favorites/Archives/Retired lines. IIRC there is a Met card of him somewhere in there, so there must be a Padre one of him as well. No Topps Padres McReynolds cards exist. None were ever produced, not even in Mac's retirement.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: The St. Petersburg Times said "Charley". So did Newsday. http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/mets/welcome-to-the-show-the-mets-first-game-1.3736435

The St. Petersburg Times said "Charley". http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=888&dat=19611216&id=_19SAAAAIBAJ&sjid=PXkDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6123,2633688

It's "Charlie" Neal, according to the paper of record.

More Charlie trouble. So what's the correct spelling for this guy's first name? In a random sampling of literature, it's spelled "Charley" in Ryckek's The Amazing Mets, but "Charlie" in Koppett's The New York Mets.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Edgy DC wrote: How about that card not spelling Charley's name the way he did? seawolf17 wrote: Topps don't care. We spell things the way we want to spell things, bitch. Smith appeared on a Topps card eight times, once a year from 1962 - 1969. Topps spelled his first name correctly only twice; in 1963 and in 1967. Topps' misspelling of Smith's first name is what probably threw Sage off the trail. Is this a Mets card or a Chisox card? Or both? Or neither?

Edgy DC wrote: How about that card not spelling Charley's name the way he did? seawolf17 wrote: Topps don't care. We spell things the way we want to spell things, bitch. Smith appeared on a Topps card eight times, once a year from 1962 - 1969. Topps spelled his first name correctly only twice; in 1963 and in 1967. Topps' misspelling of Smith's first name is what probably threw Sage off the trail.

Extra Credit: Four Mets hit exactly 19 HR's in a season, but never 20 or more. Two of those Mets - Staub and Burnitz - were guessed at in this afternoon's quiz. Name the other two.

metirish wrote: I voted Nats and Texas..... wouldn't mind seeing Texas win one of these things. but seriously, as long as it's not you know who I'm happy. Don't forget that the last team in Washington became the Texas Rangers. So there's that. I'd like nothing more than an all Wild-Card series. That's what I usually root for unless the you know who's are a WC team.

DONE!

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: You have 2 Strawberry cards. That's a bonus card, featuring two (plus Hojo in the background) members of the Mets 20 HR club.

One more Met.

G-Fafif wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Five to go. Six to go. Five to go. This time I mean it. Five. Reiterating Eddie Murray (not shown). Plus I assume Hairston is implied (no card). Correct. 2 left.

2 2 go