2021 Collective Bargaining Agreement Discussion Thread

[Ehjays]

[John_Havok]

MLS owners have "run out of ideas..."

 

LOL

[connorp]

The scab games would count though, right? Kind of comical. I’d pay attention at least

[connorp]

MLS owners have "run out of ideas..."

 

LOL

 

The players should focus on “winning” this round, in getting owners to concede more then they’d like to. That’s prob possible. You’re ok with the fact the players are trying to retroactively go back and win prior CBAs as well. Players aren’t looking to meet in the middle, they’re digging in. That’s why they don’t want a mediator

[John_Havok]

The players should focus on “winning” this round, in getting owners to concede more then they’d like to. That’s prob possible. You’re ok with the fact the players are trying to retroactively go back and win prior CBAs as well. Players aren’t looking to meet in the middle, they’re digging in. That’s why they don’t want a mediator

 

I think they will be content with winning this round. I suspect greatly that if the owner's gave in to the minimum salary requirements, or at least much closer to their requested # (say ... 700K minimum with 25K annual escalators) the union would quite likely back off the CBT and accept # much closer to where it is right now.

 

I dont think the union is dead set on winning 3 or more "large victories" but they have to appear that they are willing to to get the actual win that they want.

[John_Havok]

"Players aren’t looking to meet in the middle, they’re digging in."

 

What are the owners doing? They're moving just as slow as the players. Union wants 110 million bonus pool, comes down 5 million. MLB wants 10 million, goes up 5. Can't put the "not willing to meet in the middle" squarely on the players side.

[Krylian]

Both sides need to understand that they're really not that important and people will just move on and find something else to do with their lives. Without fans, this sport doesn't exist.

[Ehjays]

 

https://www.thescore.com/mlb/news/2303351

 

MLB fans ask Manfred for seat at bargaining table with full-page ad

 

Baseball fans took out a full-page ad in a Milwaukee newspaper to call on MLB commissioner Rob Manfred to include them in labor talks during the ongoing work stoppage.

 

"Fans don't need one-way declarations about your cancellation of the sport we love. If you're going to collectively bargain over how to best divvy up our money, what we really want is to be heard and respected. We want a seat at the table," the National Fans Union wrote in the Journal Sentinel in response to an open letter by Manfred when the lockout was implemented in early December.

 

"Without us, decisions will be made with only the billionaire owners and millionaire players in mind: not the fans whose support makes the entire enterprise possible," the group added. "With us, MLB has an opportunity to change the conversation and turn this labor dispute into an historic 'calling in' of the group most often disregarded.

 

"It's time for fans to be part of the conversation over how our dollars should be spent, and how our favorite pastimes treat us."

 

MLB and the MLBPA need to reach a deal before March or the start of the regular season will be in jeopardy. Spring training and exhibition games have already been delayed.

[M.E.]

"Players aren’t looking to meet in the middle, they’re digging in."

 

What are the owners doing? They're moving just as slow as the players. Union wants 110 million bonus pool, comes down 5 million. MLB wants 10 million, goes up 5. Can't put the "not willing to meet in the middle" squarely on the players side.

 

The owners went from 0 to 15M. That is a give as they know that this number if ever agreed to is going to become forever and grow massively each Agreement.

[John_Havok]

The owners went from 0 to 15M. That is a give as they know that this number if ever agreed to is going to become forever and grow massively each Agreement.

 

Yep its a give, and both sides agreed that a bonus pool should be used. THey just differ on the amounts.

 

Meeting in the middle would be meeting at 55 million. Get it done and get on the field.

[connorp]

"Players aren’t looking to meet in the middle, they’re digging in."

 

What are the owners doing? They're moving just as slow as the players. Union wants 110 million bonus pool, comes down 5 million. MLB wants 10 million, goes up 5. Can't put the "not willing to meet in the middle" squarely on the players side.

 

There’s willingness at least. Listen, in fantasy I’m usually a person that puts a good offer out there right away. There’s some people that negotiate like Mlb is doing and I’m not a fan of that but I think a mediator would be productive.

[glory]

The players should focus on “winning” this round, in getting owners to concede more then they’d like to. That’s prob possible. You’re ok with the fact the players are trying to retroactively go back and win prior CBAs as well. Players aren’t looking to meet in the middle, they’re digging in. That’s why they don’t want a mediator

 

Yeah, I don't think what the players are asking for is unreasonable, but the entire structure is so different from previous CBA's that it's clearly an attempt to make up for getting screwed in the last one (or last couple). Arb after year 2 + $100-115m pre arb pool + 36% increase in league minimum + 15% increase in CBT (from 2021 to 2022). Again, can the owners afford to make these changes, or at least meet somewhere in the middle on them? Sure, but you can't correct the structure in one CBA. Lay the ground work and then build from there seems like a more realistic way to implement these things. If they agree to a pre arb bonus, even if it's $20-30 million this time around, it's still a new structure built into the CBA that didn't exist before and it can grow over time. You can't make all the money back in one negotiation.

 

If the owners agreed with the $775k minimum, raised the pre arb bonus to say $50m, and did the lottery for the top 7 teams, then maybe the players back off on the CBT increase. If they do all that while getting the 14 team playoff format and advertising on the uniforms, they'd still come out way ahead in the end, but the players would get a win as well. There has to be a middle ground when it's just money, but I don't think either side wants to go there.

[Terminator]

The players should focus on “winning” this round, in getting owners to concede more then they’d like to. That’s prob possible. You’re ok with the fact the players are trying to retroactively go back and win prior CBAs as well. Players aren’t looking to meet in the middle, they’re digging in. That’s why they don’t want a mediator

 

No way! The owners are the ones digging in. The owners would come out with a win if they simply signed on for the players very first offer. There's that much added revenue since last time the CBA was signed.

[connorp]

No way! The owners are the ones digging in. The owners would come out with a win if they simply signed on for the players very first offer. There's that much added revenue since last time the CBA was signed.

 

Idk man. I just don’t see it. Just basic numbers, say a team takes in $350m top line rev., pays $150m to mlb player salaries, now all the other expenses (admin, milb, upkeep, finance charges, taxes, etc). There’s literally going to be teams where one player is making as much as the owner. What other solid business does that happen at lol

[Terminator]

Idk man. I just don’t see it. Just basic numbers, say a team takes in $350m top line rev., pays $150m to mlb player salaries, now all the other expenses (admin, milb, upkeep, finance charges, taxes, etc).

 

Ok? So in this scenario the players get less than half of the revenue. That's bad, they should get more.

 

There’s literally going to be teams where one player is making as much as the owner. What other solid business does that happen at lol

 

Good! No one shows up to see some 80 year old billionaire. They show up to watch Bryce Harper.

 

The owners often don't even pay for their own stadiums. The taxpayers foot the bill. Also, the Rockies owners are the biggest crybabies out of any of them and the bought the team for 95 million in 1992. The team is worth 1.3 Billion dollars today. And the continuously bitch about how hard it is for them lol.

 

I don't think I've seen anyone take the owners side in this debate except you and the MLB.com writers who are on the official dole.

[Spanky99]

Ok? So in this scenario the players get less than half of the revenue. That's bad, they should get more.

 

 

 

Good! No one shows up to see some 80 year old billionaire. They show up to watch Bryce Harper.

 

The owners often don't even pay for their own stadiums. The taxpayers foot the bill. Also, the Rockies owners are the biggest crybabies out of any of them and the bought the team for 95 million in 1992. The team is worth 1.3 Billion dollars today. And the continuously bitch about how hard it is for them lol.

 

I don't think I've seen anyone take the owners side in this debate except you and the MLB.com writers who are on the official dole.

 

There's a couple more, they're gross bro. ;p

[Brownie19]

Ok? So in this scenario the players get less than half of the revenue. That's bad, they should get more.

 

 

 

Good! No one shows up to see some 80 year old billionaire. They show up to watch Bryce Harper.

 

The owners often don't even pay for their own stadiums. The taxpayers foot the bill. Also, the Rockies owners are the biggest crybabies out of any of them and the bought the team for 95 million in 1992. The team is worth 1.3 Billion dollars today. And the continuously bitch about how hard it is for them lol.

 

I don't think I've seen anyone take the owners side in this debate except you and the MLB.com writers who are on the official dole.

 

I think this mirrors the issues and concerns we are seeing across North America. Owners are getting wealthier and wealthier and the general public keeps getting poorer and poorer (only in this case - the players aren't poor). It will be fascinating if in general we're able to reverse this trend.

[Jimcanuck]

I think this mirrors the issues and concerns we are seeing across North America. Owners are getting wealthier and wealthier and the general public keeps getting poorer and poorer (only in this case - the players aren't poor). It will be fascinating if in general we're able to reverse this trend.

 

Players have Marvin Miller to thank. Widening wealth gap is directly related to sharp reductions in the number of unionized employees in the past few decades.

[Ehjays]

[Terminator]

Players have Marvin Miller to thank. Widening wealth gap is directly related to sharp reductions in the number of unionized employees in the past few decades.

 

Did you know that the players are in fact unionized Jim?

[Abomination]

 

That's really misleading. If I'm reading it right, the $104M includes $42M not related directly to the team, and also includes money from winning the World Series (which probably added $25 to $30M). Realistically, a great exciting young team with a middle of the pack payroll that had everything go right probably made $30M

[connorp]

Ok? So in this scenario the players get less than half of the revenue. That's bad, they should get more.

 

 

 

Good! No one shows up to see some 80 year old billionaire. They show up to watch Bryce Harper.

 

The owners often don't even pay for their own stadiums. The taxpayers foot the bill. Also, the Rockies owners are the biggest crybabies out of any of them and the bought the team for 95 million in 1992. The team is worth 1.3 Billion dollars today. And the continuously bitch about how hard it is for them lol.

 

I don't think I've seen anyone take the owners side in this debate except you and the MLB.com writers who are on the official dole.

 

Here’s how most businesses, besides little mom&pop operations, work: People don’t go to see the owner. The owner/management try to put out an appealing product for the consumer.

 

I’m not on the owners side, I merely understand their pov. As I do the players. There needs to be a middle ground and it’s just my opinion that I think owners are more in line with that thought rn than players

[connorp]

I mean, you can say “orange man bad” towards the billionaire owners, or you can do the same thing about guys that get paid $40m to play a kids game. Neither stance is really helpful

[John_Havok]

That's really misleading. If I'm reading it right, the $104M includes $42M not related directly to the team, and also includes money from winning the World Series (which probably added $25 to $30M). Realistically, a great exciting young team with a middle of the pack payroll that had everything go right probably made $30M

 

Whether directly realted or not, its money they made because of the team. Plus, the Braves are publically owned so aside from them and the Jays, we'll never see anything like this from any other team to even guess at the real numbers.

[Abomination]

Whether directly realted or not, its money they made because of the team. Plus, the Braves are publically owned so aside from them and the Jays, we'll never see anything like this from any other team to even guess at the real numbers.

 

Well, the other money was from real estate development deals I believe. I would consider that in the same vein as a player signing a promotional deal with a company.

 

The point I was making was that the numbers highlighted were probably not typical. The $30M figure was likely much more in line. Sure, some teams like the Yankees and Dodgers are probably much, much higher. Others may not even be viable except for franchise value appreciation. This was actually kind of hinted at by Boras if I remember right (of course, his argument was basically that the increase in franchise valuation should be counted in the revenue calculations).

[Brownie19]

Did you know that the players are in fact unionized Jim?

 

He does - he was responding to my reflection on the general wealth gap situation we're facing in North America. What do you guys think of unions? I will admit I haven't done a lick of research, but I always seem to hear that unions allow staff to f*** the dog. There's generally little incentive to push and do a better job than the guy beside you and very few are willing to go above and beyond to better the company. Maybe there's nothing wrong with that?

[Jimcanuck]

Did you know that the players are in fact unionized Jim?

 

Good God, really?

[Ehjays]

Liberty Media Reports Substantial Revenue Increase For Braves

By Steve Adams

 

As one of just two MLB clubs owned by a publicly traded company, the Braves are the rare team whose books are regularly opened to the public. That leads to some yearly insight into the team’s revenues and operating budget. This morning, Liberty Media announced its 2021 earnings, reporting $568MM in total Braves revenue, $104MM in OIBDA (operating income before debt and amortization) and a $20MM operating income (Twitter links via Eric Fisher of SportBusiness Group and Jeff Passan of ESPN, the latter of whom has screenshots of the report).

 

Those numbers are specific to the Braves, not Liberty Media as a whole, and they represent (as one would expect) marked increases over the previous year’s revenues, when the MLB season was played without fans and shortened to 60 games in length. In 2020, Liberty reported a total of $178MM in revenue and operating losses both in OIBDA (-$53MM) and operating income (-$128MM).

 

It’s worth pointing out, too, that the Braves and other MLB teams opened the season without home stadiums at full capacity — although the Braves were the first team to shift to full capacity near the end of April. Still, their season began with Truist Park at 33% capacity for their initial seven-game homestand and moved to 50% capacity for their second homestand — another seven-game set later in the month. Atlanta averaged 13,006 fans per game during that first homestand (per the attendance figures available at Baseball-Reference) and 19,224 fans per day in that second homestand (which included a seven-inning doubleheader). Over the remainder of the season, the Braves averaged 32,181 fans per game, according to those same attendance figures.

 

Of course, while the Braves, like every other team, surely lost some early-season gate revenue due to capacity restrictions of varying levels, the Braves also reeled in more postseason revenue than any other organization in the sport. Truist Park hosted eight playoff contests as the Braves eventually took home a World Series championship. Liberty Media lists 79 regular-season home games (accounting for a pair of doubleheaders) and eight postseason home games, with a reported $6MM in “baseball revenue” (not “profit”) per home game.

 

Future regular-season earnings for the Braves seem quite likely to rise — not only because they’ll very likely be able to open the 2022 season at full capacity but also because the team’s 2021 success has paved the way for a considerable hike in ticket sales. Liberty Media president Greg Maffei said today that the Braves’ 2022 season ticket sales are already the highest they’ve been since 2000 (Twitter link via Jeff Schultz of The Athletic). David O’Brien of The Athletic adds that premium seating at Truist Park has already been sold out.

 

The earnings report from Liberty Media comes at a time when eyes are more fixated on the financial component of the game than ever before. Major League Baseball and the MLB Players Association are deadlocked in labor strife that, at its core, boils down to how the two parties ought to divide the billions of dollars generated by the league on a yearly basis. Commissioner Rob Manfred has already taken a great deal of flak for his claims that the “return on those investments (into owning a baseball team) is below what you’d expect to get in the stock market,” and his critics have already meted out a fresh set of barbs on social media today in the wake of Liberty’s books being opened.

 

Braves fans, in particular, are taking note of the team’s financials, as an understandably vocal majority has grown frustrated with the lack of a new contract for franchise cornerstone Freddie Freeman. Today’s report will do little to deter fans’ belief that the team can “afford” to re-sign Freeman, but that does not mean that ownership and/or general manager Alex Anthopoulos will make it happen at all costs. It’s never really been a question of whether the Braves have the pure funds to outbid the field, after all, but rather one of whether ownership is comfortable making a commitment of that magnitude and perhaps whether the front office deems it to be prudent.

 

With regard to the labor discord, both the league and the union will interpret the figures differently for the purposes of negotiations. Ownership will presumably point to the $20MM operating income. The union will likely more heavily weight the OIBDA and note that these figures do not include (as pointed out by Ben Nicholson-Smith, on Twitter) tax benefits/write-offs, baseball-adjacent revenues from The Battery (the mixed-use development surrounding Truist Park) or the general appreciation in franchise value. The Battery, according to Liberty’s figures, generated an additional $42MM in revenue and added another $7MM onto the Braves’ OIBDA (for a total of $111MM). At the end of the day, while it’s new information for fans and the MLBPA, the league has surely been aware of these figures and their timeline for release and already has a sense of the role the specifics will play in negotiations.

[Abomination]

He does - he was responding to my reflection on the general wealth gap situation we're facing in North America. What do you guys think of unions? I will admit I haven't done a lick of research, but I always seem to hear that unions allow staff to f*** the dog. There's generally little incentive to push and do a better job than the guy beside you and very few are willing to go above and beyond to better the company. Maybe there's nothing wrong with that?

 

 

Unions are both good and bad. They help ensure a livable wage and good working condition (good), but also make it nearly impossible for companies to fire terrible workers (bad).

 

IMO livable wages should be handled through legislation (in many places they're nowhere close, especially in the States). Raises above that can probably be handled by free market principles. Companies should not be allowed to force employees to sign agreements that prevent them from ever working for a competitor. It should be a union's job to ensure that companies are respecting worker's rights and providing a safe and inclusive working environment, aiding in inter-office disputes, and things like that.

[Deadpool]

He does - he was responding to my reflection on the general wealth gap situation we're facing in North America. What do you guys think of unions? I will admit I haven't done a lick of research, but I always seem to hear that unions allow staff to f*** the dog. There's generally little incentive to push and do a better job than the guy beside you and very few are willing to go above and beyond to better the company. Maybe there's nothing wrong with that?

 

I've been in good unions and bad unions, but it's inarguable that the decline of unions has coincided with the ridonkulously massive income inequality crisis we face. We explored unionizing the company I work for a few years ago, but we had some (unrelated) staffing changes. I would 100% rather be in a union job than not.