Marlins’ profits came at taxpayer expense

[Gary]

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=jp-marlinsfinancials082410

The swindlers who run the Florida Marlins got exposed Monday. They are as bad as anyone on Wall Street, scheming, misleading and ultimately sticking taxpayers with a multibillion-dollar tab. Corporate fraud is alive and well in Major League Baseball.
A look at the leak of the Marlins’ financial information to Deadspin confirmed the long-held belief that the team takes a healthy chunk of MLB-distributed money for profit. Owner Jeffrey Loria and president David Samson for years have contended the Marlins break even financially, the centerpiece fiscal argument that resulted in local governments gifting them a new stadium that will cost generations of taxpayers an estimated $2.4 billion. They said they had no money to do it alone and intimated they would have to move the team without public assistance.


More......




Well crap.. Think this throws a wrench into how they deal with the Arena out here?

 

[Circa_1985_Fan]

It very well could throw a wrench...but yet it may not. The Maloofs and the NBA are a different beast compared to MLB. The NBA and David Stern have a much more handle on their owners worth, and thus creating a unified salary cap, which baseball does not have. I do believe that if Cal Expo agrees to go ahead with everything with the land swap and it goes to the state, Stern will step up yet again for the Maloofs and the city in trying to push this forward. Baseball doesn't have as strong a hold on it's owners as the NBA, where else can a former owner become commissioner? Hello Mr. Selig...

 

[MoneyMike916]

Miami-Dade County agreed – without the consent of taxpayers – to take $409 million in loans loaded with balloon payments and long grace periods. By 2049, when the debt is due, the county will have paid billions

.
Horrible

 

[Superman]

I don't think that the way MLB gets new ballparks built has much bearing on the way the NBA gets new arenas built. I'm sure there are similarities, but the way the league handles revenue sharing and profit margins and such is totally different. And with the Marlins, in a state with no income tax, compared to the Kings in tax loaded and bankrupt California, I doubt you'll have an agreement put in place that sees the citizens footing the bill for $409 million in loans (which is about how much a new arena would cost anyway). (Edit: There's also the thought that the county could have just told the Marlins to kick rocks. I wonder what those city commissioners got in exchange for their willingness to run up the credit card...)

That situation, if the article is accurate, is horrible. But I don't think it will affect the Kings situation at all.

 

[kennadog]

Well, it potentially gives ammunition to thoise against the new Sacramento arena. I'm sure they'd be happy to point it out, even if it was actually not the least bit similar. Yes, I'm cynical.

 

[Superman]

Well, it potentially gives ammunition to thoise against the new Sacramento arena. I'm sure they'd be happy to point it out, even if it was actually not the least bit similar. Yes, I'm cynical.

Who is against a new arena in Sacramento? Isn't it just people who want to know the logistics and how it's going to get paid for? I don't think there's anyone opposed to building a new arena. Maybe I missed it...

I don't blame you for being cynical. But the NBA does a much better job of keeping track of revenue sharing and takes a more active role in new arena projects than the MLB does. That's the main difference to me. I'm sure there will be a number of $100 handshakes and plenty of quid pro quo going on *if* a new arena gets done, but I don't think the residents in the area and the state will be stuck with a huge bill without taxpayer approval.

 

[Telemachus]

Who is against a new arena in Sacramento? Isn't it just people who want to know the logistics and how it's going to get paid for? I don't think there's anyone opposed to building a new arena. Maybe I missed it...

I have met several people who aren't sports fans that are against a new arena. Of course, they are also the ones who tend to think that an arena is only for the Kings. They figure that if they aren't going to use it, then the city might as well not have it to begin with.

 

[kennadog]

Superman, I'm not cynical that the taxpayers are going to get stuck with some huge bill ala the Marlins. I'm cynical about tactics groups use to scare people, these days, whether their arguments have any basis in reality or not. I would not put it past anti-arena folks to use the Marlins example of what could happen.

Of course, on the current land swap deal, the vote that's going to be toughest row to hoe is the state legislature and the governor.

 

[Superman]

I have met several people who aren't sports fans that are against a new arena. Of course, they are also the ones who tend to think that an arena is only for the Kings. They figure that if they aren't going to use it, then the city might as well not have it to begin with.

So are they saying "we don't want a new arena," or are they saying "we don't want to pay for a new arena," or "we don't want a new arena in our neighborhood because of congestion, etc." I don't live near Sacramento, so I'm obviously not as aware as you guys are. But it seems strange that anyone would be dead set against a construction/development project that could boost the local economy.

 

[VF21]

So are they saying "we don't want a new arena," or are they saying "we don't want to pay for a new arena," or "we don't want a new arena in our neighborhood because of congestion, etc." I don't live near Sacramento, so I'm obviously not as aware as you guys are. But it seems strange that anyone would be dead set against a construction/development project that could boost the local economy.

There are some people who, just for an example, use the justification that "It's not right to build a new arena when there are people in Sacramento who don't even have homes." There is a small group of people who would say "no" to just about anything, just for the contrarian aspects. And, unfortunately, the local newspaper has a proclivity for advancing the agendas of those sorts.

 

[Bricklayer]

Superman, I'm not cynical that the taxpayers are going to get stuck with some huge bill ala the Marlins. I'm cynical about tactics groups use to scare people, these days, whether their arguments have any basis in reality or not. I would not put it past anti-arena folks to use the Marlins example of what could happen.

Of course, on the current land swap deal, the vote that's going to be toughest row to hoe is the state legislature and the governor.

This sounds about right. Of course it will be used in that way. Politics isn't actually about facts or policy anymore, just who can scare the most voters with their soundbites.

 

[bajaden]

So are they saying "we don't want a new arena," or are they saying "we don't want to pay for a new arena," or "we don't want a new arena in our neighborhood because of congestion, etc." I don't live near Sacramento, so I'm obviously not as aware as you guys are. But it seems strange that anyone would be dead set against a construction/development project that could boost the local economy.

All you have to do is read some of the posts made by close minded people in the Bee, or on other websites. Some of these people won't even discuss the idea of an arena for any purpose. They all have their own agenda's, whether it be schools, library's or penal institutions. To their mind, an arena is a luxury, no matter what purpose it serves, and they only see tax dollars going out into rich pockets, and none coming back for the poor people of sacramento. Its the typical, the rich get richer on the backs of the little man. They forget, that while there's an element of truth in that statement, the rich are also the one's that employ the little man. With little man being their terminology, not mine.

 

[Circa_1985_Fan]

This sounds about right. Of course it will be used in that way. Politics isn't actually about facts or policy anymore, just who can scare the most voters with their soundbites.

Yup...you got it Brick! And partisan politics REALLY isn't alive anymore, since all politicians go to bed together once the lights go out anyway. I really dont think the Marlins situation will have any bearing on how Sacramento goes about getting a new arena, and I think any nay sayer that brings this point up really is misinformed about the situation at hand here in our city. The Maloofs, for all extensive purposes(according to alot of reports)have lost half their worth, and at this point yes...they want a new arena, but it also has to be successful in the market that it's in, and the most potential for that is here in good ole' Sacramento. So in order for that to happen, they have to 'get along' with everyone locally. None of the proposals for a new arena were a direct proposal from the Maloofs, including the land swap deal being worked on right now. Anyone that still thinks its 'the billionaire brothers Maloof laughing all the way to the bank and trying to get handouts' is VERY VERY misinformed. At this point in their lives, I see them moreso than ever planting roots here in Sacramento, and those that don't notice that are just being stupid. That said, they want this to work long term...and yes, a new arena would help them, but it's about civic growth more than anything else...and Sacramento FINALLY pulling up it's big boy pants and stepping up to the plate and working to get something done on it's own for the first time in history. The Railyards REALLY need to be developed, and developed NOW! And this development NEEDS to include a new arena(that will be owned by the city)and allow us to become the world class city that past mayors have denied us the ability to become. We need this to FINALLY find our true identity as a city, and that includes the Kings. GET IT DONE DAMMIT!

 

[Superman]

There are some people who, just for an example, use the justification that "It's not right to build a new arena when there are people in Sacramento who don't even have homes." There is a small group of people who would say "no" to just about anything, just for the contrarian aspects. And, unfortunately, the local newspaper has a proclivity for advancing the agendas of those sorts.

Okay, I understand that line of reasoning, but I don't see how it holds sway. Of course, as Brick says below, people sometimes don't even try to make sense anymore. A new arena would put people back to work so that they can pay for homes.

Being out of the area, I'm obviously not as emotional about the whole deal as other people are, but it's getting to the point where the city/county affairs are the major obstacle to the arena deal, and were the Maloofs to actually move the team -- which I don't think they want to do -- it would be hard to blame them. It would suck, but it wouldn't be totally their fault.

 

[kennadog]

As far as I'm concerned, it won't be their fault at all. They've tried for 10 years now. As I've said before, it won't be the Maloofs jilting Sacramento, it'll be Sacramento throwing them out the door. Why stay where you're not wanted? (I hang onto hope, but it's hard.)

 

[Circa_1985_Fan]

As far as I'm concerned, it won't be their fault at all. They've tried for 10 years now. As I've said before, it won't be the Maloofs jilting Sacramento, it'll be Sacramento throwing them out the door. Why stay where you're not wanted? (I hang onto hope, but it's hard.)

Yup, that about sums it up Kenna. But hell, if the city of Cleveland can hang on to the gawd awful Indians(and every other team)then we can hang onto 1 for God's sake. If the Sacramento community/civic leaders throws the Kings out the door, then this city doesnt deserve any other major league team, because it's obvious that it wants to hold onto it's 'sleepy little town' syndrome. Sacramento will NEVER be major league EVER again if we lose the Kings...and I will find it hard to take pride in my hometown ever again if that happens.