Salaries of Baseball Executives

[Jon]

AP[/url]"]Selig received $14.5 million in the 12 months ending Oct. 31, according to Major League Baseball's tax return, which was obtained by the Sports Business Journal.

 

Bob DuPuy, baseball's chief operating officer, received $4,875,000, the publication reported in this week's issue. Pay for executive vice presidents included $1.92 million for Rob Manfred (labor relations), $1.3 million for John McHale Jr. (administration) and $1,245,000 for Jonathan Mariner (finance).

 

Sandy Alderson, who quit as executive vice president of baseball operations in 2005 to become chief executive officer of the San Diego Padres, made $875,000. Jimmie Lee Solomon, who replaced Alderson in June 2005, made $543,583.

.................

Baseball's central office paid $77.3 million in salaries and benefits to 231 employees, the report said. The NFL paid $41.5 million to 839 employees in 12 months ending March 31 last year and the NHL $13.9 million to 56 employees in the year ending June 30, 2005, when staff was reduced because of a lockout.

Basically, MLB has more money than they know what to do with right now.

[Derwood]

Selig officially has no right to complain about player salaries ever again

[Abe Frohman]

Obviously, it isn't enough money because they can't seem to understand that with this MLB Extra Innings bs, they are ONCE AGAIN sticking it in the keister of all us little people who love the game enough to load their wallets.

 

Like I have said time and time again, Bud Selig and his croanies are hypocritical criminals.

[cubbyvirus00]

Total corruption. Money talks, and Selig's about to retire with a nice IRA.

[BleedCubbieBlue81]

Basically, MLB has more money than they know what to do with right now.

First 20,000 fans get $1,000. I like it.

[papabear58]

Total corruption. Money talks, and Selig's about to retire with a nice IRA.

 

And in the mean time he's doing interviews saying that he knows that Baseball has "Too much product on the market"

[Elrhino]

I didn't know it was now "criminal" for a company to make money off their product.

 

I may be dating myself here, but I grew up with ONE televised baseball game a week. So I don't know how the "little guy" is getting squeezed today when they can watch upwards of 10-20 baseball games a week on just their basic cable package via ESPN, WGN, TBS, Fox Sports Network, local coverage and Fox Saturday Game of the Week. The MLB Package is a luxory package for people who can afford it. Presumably, these people can also afford to change cable subscribers if they so choose. Or they can subscribe to mlb.com and get video steams off the internet. Baseball consumers really have more options to get baseball than we could have dreamed of previously. So I really don't see how the "little guy" is getting depraved of baseball.

 

It's just like the exclusively broadcasted games on the NFL Network ... I just have to laugh at how people said the NFL is making some sort of "big mistake" broadcasting their product over their own network and "squeezing the little guy". Football fans can now watch primetime football games four out of seven nights a week. It wasn't that long ago that Monday Night was the only night you got to watch a prime time football game. When your consumers can get more of your product than ever before, and its still not enough ... that's not a bad problem to have in business.

[BigbadB]

I didn't know it was now "criminal" for a company to make money off their product.

 

I may be dating myself here, but I grew up with ONE televised baseball game a week. So I don't know how the "little guy" is getting squeezed today when they can watch upwards of 10-20 baseball games a week on just their basic cable package via ESPN, WGN, TBS, Fox Sports Network, local coverage and Fox Saturday Game of the Week. The MLB Package is a luxory package for people who can afford it. Presumably, these people can also afford to change cable subscribers if they so choose. Or they can subscribe to mlb.com and get video steams off the internet. Baseball consumers really have more options to get baseball than we could have dreamed of previously. So I really don't see how the "little guy" is getting depraved of baseball.

 

It's just like the exclusively broadcasted games on the NFL Network ... I just have to laugh at how people said the NFL is making some sort of "big mistake" broadcasting their product over their own network and "squeezing the little guy". Football fans can now watch primetime football games four out of seven nights a week. It wasn't that long ago that Monday Night was the only night you got to watch a prime time football game. When your consumers can get more of your product than ever before, and its still not enough ... that's not a bad problem to have in business.

 

You don't see a problem when it costs nearly $300.00 for a middle income family of 4 to go to a single baseball game (done the right way, of course)?

 

To each their own, I suppose.

[BigbadB]

I didn't know it was now "criminal" for a company to make money off their product.

 

We probably shouldn't complain about gas prices either. Afterall, it's not criminal for a company to make money off their product.

[Elrhino]

I didn't know it was now "criminal" for a company to make money off their product.

 

I may be dating myself here, but I grew up with ONE televised baseball game a week. So I don't know how the "little guy" is getting squeezed today when they can watch upwards of 10-20 baseball games a week on just their basic cable package via ESPN, WGN, TBS, Fox Sports Network, local coverage and Fox Saturday Game of the Week. The MLB Package is a luxory package for people who can afford it. Presumably, these people can also afford to change cable subscribers if they so choose. Or they can subscribe to mlb.com and get video steams off the internet. Baseball consumers really have more options to get baseball than we could have dreamed of previously. So I really don't see how the "little guy" is getting depraved of baseball.

 

It's just like the exclusively broadcasted games on the NFL Network ... I just have to laugh at how people said the NFL is making some sort of "big mistake" broadcasting their product over their own network and "squeezing the little guy". Football fans can now watch primetime football games four out of seven nights a week. It wasn't that long ago that Monday Night was the only night you got to watch a prime time football game. When your consumers can get more of your product than ever before, and its still not enough ... that's not a bad problem to have in business.

 

You don't see a problem when it costs nearly $300.00 for a middle income family of 4 to go to a single baseball game (done the right way, of course)?

 

To each their own, I suppose.

 

Nope, and given the rise of attendance figures, it doesn't seem to be a problem with many other people either. I just recently read that the Cactus League attendance was up 1.17 million over last year.

 

If the family believes they have to watch the baseball game the "right way" (whatever that means) obviously they have $300 of expendable money to blow. If they want to, they can also do what I do ... buy a cheap ticket and bring your own peanuts and bottled water into the stadium. Many things in life can be as cheap or as expensive as you choose to make them. If you don't have $300 to spend at the ballpark, then don't buy the $6 hot dog and the $6.50 12 oz. cup of beer.

Edited April 3, 2007 by Elrhino

[Elrhino]

I didn't know it was now "criminal" for a company to make money off their product.

 

We probably shouldn't complain about gas prices either. Afterall, it's not criminal for a company to make money off their product.

 

Or they can cut down on their gas consumption or take mass transportation. Its not your given right to entitlement to have cheap gasoline ... the rest of the world doesn't.

 

But surely we can see the difference in elasticity between a baseball game and gasoline.

Edited April 3, 2007 by Elrhino

[CubColtPacer]

I didn't know it was now "criminal" for a company to make money off their product.

 

I may be dating myself here, but I grew up with ONE televised baseball game a week. So I don't know how the "little guy" is getting squeezed today when they can watch upwards of 10-20 baseball games a week on just their basic cable package via ESPN, WGN, TBS, Fox Sports Network, local coverage and Fox Saturday Game of the Week. The MLB Package is a luxory package for people who can afford it. Presumably, these people can also afford to change cable subscribers if they so choose. Or they can subscribe to mlb.com and get video steams off the internet. Baseball consumers really have more options to get baseball than we could have dreamed of previously. So I really don't see how the "little guy" is getting depraved of baseball.

 

It's just like the exclusively broadcasted games on the NFL Network ... I just have to laugh at how people said the NFL is making some sort of "big mistake" broadcasting their product over their own network and "squeezing the little guy". Football fans can now watch primetime football games four out of seven nights a week. It wasn't that long ago that Monday Night was the only night you got to watch a prime time football game. When your consumers can get more of your product than ever before, and its still not enough ... that's not a bad problem to have in business.

 

You don't see a problem when it costs nearly $300.00 for a middle income family of 4 to go to a single baseball game (done the right way, of course)?

 

To each their own, I suppose.

 

Can you tell me how a family of 4 would spend $300 to go to a single baseball game? I'm sure it's possible, but it's not close to the average of what a family would spend.

[BigbadB]

It's just another big corporation sticking it to the man. If you don't see that, I don't know what to tell you.

 

Many, if not most, of those fans are in debt up to their eyeballs. They bought their tickets with credit cards that are maxed out, they pulled up to their parking spot that they are making monster monthly payments to drive, and their jobs don't pay enough to cover all that debt, so the debt keeps going up.

 

It's great that YOU can afford to go to a game with your bottle of water and your bag of peanuts and sit in the nosebleed section. A very large percentage of America still cannot afford to take their family to a game, and that percentage is climbing everyday.

[BigbadB]

Can you tell me how a family of 4 would spend $300 to go to a single baseball game? I'm sure it's possible, but it's not close to the average of what a family would spend.

 

First of all, I said nearly. Secondly, every time I go to a game with my family, that's how much it costs. Here is a breakdown:

 

$40.00 a seat x 4= $160.

$20.00 to park

 

Now we are in the stadium and haven't bought a thing to eat or drink. A hot dog is $5.00 at Petco. So are drinks, peanuts and anything else you want to eat or drink at the game. Multiply that times 4.

 

It's pretty easy to spend that, actually.

[oldcubsfan]

I didn't know it was now "criminal" for a company to make money off their product.

 

I may be dating myself here, but I grew up with ONE televised baseball game a week. So I don't know how the "little guy" is getting squeezed today when they can watch upwards of 10-20 baseball games a week on just their basic cable package via ESPN, WGN, TBS, Fox Sports Network, local coverage and Fox Saturday Game of the Week. The MLB Package is a luxory package for people who can afford it. Presumably, these people can also afford to change cable subscribers if they so choose. Or they can subscribe to mlb.com and get video steams off the internet. Baseball consumers really have more options to get baseball than we could have dreamed of previously. So I really don't see how the "little guy" is getting depraved of baseball.

 

It's just like the exclusively broadcasted games on the NFL Network ... I just have to laugh at how people said the NFL is making some sort of "big mistake" broadcasting their product over their own network and "squeezing the little guy". Football fans can now watch primetime football games four out of seven nights a week. It wasn't that long ago that Monday Night was the only night you got to watch a prime time football game. When your consumers can get more of your product than ever before, and its still not enough ... that's not a bad problem to have in business.

 

You don't see a problem when it costs nearly $300.00 for a middle income family of 4 to go to a single baseball game (done the right way, of course)?

 

To each their own, I suppose.

 

Nope, and given the rise of attendance figures, it doesn't seem to be a problem with many other people either. I just recently read that the Cactus League attendance was up 1.17 million over last year.

 

If the family believes they have to watch the baseball game the "right way" (whatever that means) obviously they have $300 of expendable money to blow. If they want to, they can also do what I do ... buy a cheap ticket and bring your own peanuts and bottled water into the stadium. Many things in life can be as cheap or as expensive as you choose to make them. If you don't have $300 to spend at the ballpark, then don't buy the $6 hot dog and the $6.50 12 oz. cup of beer.

 

Well said. I get tired of hearing of the "entitlement" game. If people don't have the money to see a game " the right way", then don't go or save up to go. No one is really entitled to anything. My season tickets cost over $22,000, and I spend it to go to the games I want to see and sit in a great seat. Of course that means I pay for a lot of games in April that aren't in big demand, but that's the price you pay. When I was young, I sat where I could for as little as possible. Baseball is still cheap compared to other sports, and the Cubs are still cheap compared to some other teams.

[Elrhino]

It's just another big corporation sticking it to the man. If you don't see that, I don't know what to tell you.

 

Many, if not most, of those fans are in debt up to their eyeballs. They bought their tickets with credit cards that are maxed out, they pulled up to their parking spot that they are making monster monthly payments to drive, and their jobs don't pay enough to cover all that debt, so the debt keeps going up.

 

It's great that YOU can afford to go to a game with your bottle of water and your bag of peanuts and sit in the nosebleed section. A very large percentage of America still cannot afford to take their family to a game, and that percentage is climbing everyday.

 

You said the average cost of a family of four is $300. I certainly can't afford that ... at least not too many times a season. What I can afford is a $15 upper deck ticket, a .75 cent bottle of water and a $2 bag of peanuts . I would hope anyone who can afford to rack up tons of interest and annual fees by purchasing on credit cards could afford that too. Otherwise, their problems are with their own personal money management, not the ubiquitous "da man bringing them down".

 

Anyone who feels any differently would be served well to travel the world a little bit, see what other people live happily with, and re-evaluate their sense of entitlement.

Edited April 3, 2007 by Elrhino

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Can you tell me how a family of 4 would spend $300 to go to a single baseball game? I'm sure it's possible, but it's not close to the average of what a family would spend.

 

First of all, I said nearly. Secondly, every time I go to a game with my family, that's how much it costs. Here is a breakdown:

 

$40.00 a seat x 4= $160.

$20.00 to park

 

Now we are in the stadium and haven't bought a thing to eat or drink. A hot dog is $5.00 at Petco. So are drinks, peanuts and anything else you want to eat or drink at the game. Multiply that times 4.

 

It's pretty easy to spend that, actually.

 

For one, it's not very difficult to find tickets cheaper than $40.00, or someplace cheaper than $20 to park. But even then you're assuming that each member of the family eats $30 worth of food?

Edited April 3, 2007 by Transmogrified Tiger

[oldcubsfan]

It's just another big corporation sticking it to the man. If you don't see that, I don't know what to tell you.

 

Many, if not most, of those fans are in debt up to their eyeballs. They bought their tickets with credit cards that are maxed out, they pulled up to their parking spot that they are making monster monthly payments to drive, and their jobs don't pay enough to cover all that debt, so the debt keeps going up.

 

It's great that YOU can afford to go to a game with your bottle of water and your bag of peanuts and sit in the nosebleed section. A very large percentage of America still cannot afford to take their family to a game, and that percentage is climbing everyday.

 

Maybe a little personal responsibilty would help those people, it's not society's job to bail out the irresponsible spending of those who want everything, even though they can't afford it.

Edited April 3, 2007 by oldcubsfan

[seanimal]

Many, if not most, of those fans are in debt up to their eyeballs. They bought their tickets with credit cards that are maxed out, they pulled up to their parking spot that they are making monster monthly payments to drive, and their jobs don't pay enough to cover all that debt, so the debt keeps going up.

 

And whose fault is that, exactly?

[Elrhino]

Many, if not most, of those fans are in debt up to their eyeballs. They bought their tickets with credit cards that are maxed out, they pulled up to their parking spot that they are making monster monthly payments to drive, and their jobs don't pay enough to cover all that debt, so the debt keeps going up.

 

And whose fault is that, exactly?

 

Obviously, Bud Selig's.

[Derwood]

Can you tell me how a family of 4 would spend $300 to go to a single baseball game? I'm sure it's possible, but it's not close to the average of what a family would spend.

 

First of all, I said nearly. Secondly, every time I go to a game with my family, that's how much it costs. Here is a breakdown:

 

$40.00 a seat x 4= $160.

$20.00 to park

 

Now we are in the stadium and haven't bought a thing to eat or drink. A hot dog is $5.00 at Petco. So are drinks, peanuts and anything else you want to eat or drink at the game. Multiply that times 4.

 

It's pretty easy to spend that, actually.

 

For one, it's not very difficult to find tickets cheaper than $40.00, or someplace cheaper than $20 to park. But even then you're assuming that each member of the family eats $30 worth of food?

 

well that speaks more to the epidemic of people constantly eating at baseball games. I go to our minor league park and see people with $6 tickets eat $50 worth of food. They are up to get more food every other inning. Seriously, eat dinner before you get there. Or just budget yourself. You don't need a hot dog, 2 beers, a pretzel, ice cream, peanuts and nachos. Do you eat that much at home?

[CubColtPacer]

I guess I just don't understand the argument very well. There are certainly more inexpensive entertainment options out there. They are not in the same class though because of two things

1) In entertainment, you have to pay a premium to see something live, to actually be there when it happens

2) These are the best at their profession

 

When you take those two into account, and compare MLB to other top of the line parts of other entertainment options such as concerts, plays, opera, symphonies, and other sports, what do you get?

 

Baseball is easily the most inexpensive option among all those things. So I just don't understand the argument-if you want to see the best live, you'll have to pay for it-and baseball has done a better job of keeping its prices down than a lot of other similar options.

[seanimal]

It's just another big corporation sticking it to the man. If you don't see that, I don't know what to tell you.

 

If by facilitating our current lavish lifestyles, then yes, they are REALLY sticking it to us. :roll:

 

I love corporations, they've provided us with automobiles, telephones, computers, airplanes, cheap gasoline, cheap food, clean water, and the ability for large amounts of people to gain wage employment. This world would be total shite if it weren't for the advent and proliferation of corporations. They do FAR more measurable good than bad. But since they don't cater to your every whim, and are actually concerned with their own survival, you decide to develop some uninformed prejudice against them.

[BigbadB]

Many, if not most, of those fans are in debt up to their eyeballs. They bought their tickets with credit cards that are maxed out, they pulled up to their parking spot that they are making monster monthly payments to drive, and their jobs don't pay enough to cover all that debt, so the debt keeps going up.

 

And whose fault is that, exactly?

 

Obviously, Bud Selig's.

 

No reason to be a smart aleck about it. It's posts like this that ruin the discussion. I'm done with it.

[BigbadB]

I love corporations, they've provided us with automobiles, telephones, computers, airplanes, cheap gasoline, cheap food, clean water, and the ability for large amounts of people to gain wage employment. This world would be total shite if it weren't for the advent and proliferation of corporations. They do FAR more measurable good than bad. But since they don't cater to your every whim, and are actually concerned with their own survival, you decide to develop some uninformed prejudice against them.

 

Now you're putting words in my mouth that I never said.

 

I really shouldn't have bothered to jump into this discussion. Yes, I can get into a game as cheaply as $5.00. Yes, I can eat and drink before the game. In that aspect, it's pretty cheap to go to a game.

 

When I go to a game, I do it up right. I can afford it when I do it.

 

Here's to Bud Selig making twice as much next year as he made this year.