Yooooooooooooennis Cespedes: To Oakland pg 44

[Backtobanks]

And let's not forget that the owners get a tax write off on everything under the sun to add to their profits. These guys are smart, successful business men and none of them are losing money. That's why there's always lots of interest when a sports franchise goes up for sale.

 

If someone's just looking for profit, there are much much better ways than a sports franchise. They do make money, but for these mega-rich guys, owning a team is more a bucket list type thing.

 

Bucket list type things are sailing to Tahiti, owning a sports franchise may be an ego thing, but it's extremely profitable. The Cubs were sold to the Tribune Co. in 1981 for $20.5 million and then sold to Ricketts for $900 million in 2009. If you know a better way to make that much profit, let me know. Some of the worst owners in sports end up selling for a lot more than they paid for a franchise.

[Tracer Bullet]

And let's not forget that the owners get a tax write off on everything under the sun to add to their profits. These guys are smart, successful business men and none of them are losing money. That's why there's always lots of interest when a sports franchise goes up for sale.

 

I think you're overstating it. None of these people bought teams primarily to make money off them.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Anytime you hear of a team being bought by an investment group, they're buying it to make money. That's what investment groups do. Obviously, they aren't always going to make as much money as they'd like, but again, that's what investment groups do. They buy a company or property and attempt to get as much profit out of it as they can by putting in as little money as they can. If it's a bucket list thing, or simply a new toy, that's usually when it's som random billionaire buying a team you wouldn't expet them to care about, like the Russian who bought the NJ Nets. The reason that a lot of people were happy about the Ricketts buying the team despite the fact that he didn't have as much money as some other options because of the fact that he was a true Cubs fan who happened to be a billionaire and wanted to win for more than just money and bragging rights.

[SouthSideRyan]

And let's not forget that the owners get a tax write off on everything under the sun to add to their profits. These guys are smart, successful business men and none of them are losing money. That's why there's always lots of interest when a sports franchise goes up for sale.

 

If someone's just looking for profit, there are much much better ways than a sports franchise. They do make money, but for these mega-rich guys, owning a team is more a bucket list type thing.

 

Bucket list type things are sailing to Tahiti, owning a sports franchise may be an ego thing, but it's extremely profitable. The Cubs were sold to the Tribune Co. in 1981 for $20.5 million and then sold to Ricketts for $900 million in 2009. If you know a better way to make that much profit, let me know. Some of the worst owners in sports end up selling for a lot more than they paid for a franchise.

 

Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results.

[KingCubsFan]

Anytime you hear of a team being bought by an investment group, they're buying it to make money. That's what investment groups do. Obviously, they aren't always going to make as much money as they'd like, but again, that's what investment groups do. They buy a company or property and attempt to get as much profit out of it as they can by putting in as little money as they can. If it's a bucket list thing, or simply a new toy, that's usually when it's som random billionaire buying a team you wouldn't expet them to care about, like the Russian who bought the NJ Nets. The reason that a lot of people were happy about the Ricketts buying the team despite the fact that he didn't have as much money as some other options because of the fact that he was a true Cubs fan who happened to be a billionaire and wanted to win for more than just money and bragging rights.

That's why "investment groups" usually don't buy sports teams, and rich sports fans like Tom Ricketts usually do. In fact, I can't think of an actual private equity firm or hedge fund buying a large stake in a sports team (besides that deal ripping off Wilpon).

[Little Slide Rooter]

Anytime you hear of a team being bought by an investment group, they're buying it to make money. That's what investment groups do. Obviously, they aren't always going to make as much money as they'd like, but again, that's what investment groups do. They buy a company or property and attempt to get as much profit out of it as they can by putting in as little money as they can. If it's a bucket list thing, or simply a new toy, that's usually when it's som random billionaire buying a team you wouldn't expet them to care about, like the Russian who bought the NJ Nets. The reason that a lot of people were happy about the Ricketts buying the team despite the fact that he didn't have as much money as some other options because of the fact that he was a true Cubs fan who happened to be a billionaire and wanted to win for more than just money and bragging rights.

That's why "investment groups" usually don't buy sports teams, and rich sports fans like Tom Ricketts usually do. In fact, I can't think of an actual private equity firm or hedge fund buying a large stake in a sports team (besides that deal ripping off Wilpon).

 

In baseball, no but I think that there are a handful of NBA and NHL teams owned by partnerships and corporations.

[Tracer Bullet]

And let's not forget that the owners get a tax write off on everything under the sun to add to their profits. These guys are smart, successful business men and none of them are losing money. That's why there's always lots of interest when a sports franchise goes up for sale.

 

If someone's just looking for profit, there are much much better ways than a sports franchise. They do make money, but for these mega-rich guys, owning a team is more a bucket list type thing.

 

Bucket list type things are sailing to Tahiti, owning a sports franchise may be an ego thing, but it's extremely profitable. The Cubs were sold to the Tribune Co. in 1981 for $20.5 million and then sold to Ricketts for $900 million in 2009. If you know a better way to make that much profit, let me know. Some of the worst owners in sports end up selling for a lot more than they paid for a franchise.

 

Yet the Trib went bankrupt. You'd think with their investment expertise, they could have avoided such a fate.

[SouthSideRyan]

And let's not forget that the owners get a tax write off on everything under the sun to add to their profits. These guys are smart, successful business men and none of them are losing money. That's why there's always lots of interest when a sports franchise goes up for sale.

 

If someone's just looking for profit, there are much much better ways than a sports franchise. They do make money, but for these mega-rich guys, owning a team is more a bucket list type thing.

 

Bucket list type things are sailing to Tahiti, owning a sports franchise may be an ego thing, but it's extremely profitable. The Cubs were sold to the Tribune Co. in 1981 for $20.5 million and then sold to Ricketts for $900 million in 2009. If you know a better way to make that much profit, let me know. Some of the worst owners in sports end up selling for a lot more than they paid for a franchise.

 

Yet the Trib went bankrupt. You'd think with their investment expertise, they could have avoided such a fate.

 

Should've bought more sports teams

[CarolinaCubFan]

And let's not forget that the owners get a tax write off on everything under the sun to add to their profits. These guys are smart, successful business men and none of them are losing money. That's why there's always lots of interest when a sports franchise goes up for sale.

 

If someone's just looking for profit, there are much much better ways than a sports franchise. They do make money, but for these mega-rich guys, owning a team is more a bucket list type thing.

 

Bucket list type things are sailing to Tahiti, owning a sports franchise may be an ego thing, but it's extremely profitable. The Cubs were sold to the Tribune Co. in 1981 for $20.5 million and then sold to Ricketts for $900 million in 2009. If you know a better way to make that much profit, let me know. Some of the worst owners in sports end up selling for a lot more than they paid for a franchise.

 

Yet the Trib went bankrupt. You'd think with their investment expertise, they could have avoided such a fate.

 

I'm sure being in the Newspaper business had nothing to do with that.

[Backtobanks]

And let's not forget that the owners get a tax write off on everything under the sun to add to their profits. These guys are smart, successful business men and none of them are losing money. That's why there's always lots of interest when a sports franchise goes up for sale.

 

I think you're overstating it. None of these people bought teams primarily to make money off them.

 

I think you're overstating it. I can't believe you know that there isn't any sports franchise owner who bought a team for the profit potential. I would guess that the overwhelming majority of owners bought primarily for profit/tax write offs as opposed to ego/bucket list.

[Backtobanks]

And let's not forget that the owners get a tax write off on everything under the sun to add to their profits. These guys are smart, successful business men and none of them are losing money. That's why there's always lots of interest when a sports franchise goes up for sale.

 

If someone's just looking for profit, there are much much better ways than a sports franchise. They do make money, but for these mega-rich guys, owning a team is more a bucket list type thing.

 

Bucket list type things are sailing to Tahiti, owning a sports franchise may be an ego thing, but it's extremely profitable. The Cubs were sold to the Tribune Co. in 1981 for $20.5 million and then sold to Ricketts for $900 million in 2009. If you know a better way to make that much profit, let me know. Some of the worst owners in sports end up selling for a lot more than they paid for a franchise.

 

Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results.

 

I'm sure most there won't necessarily be those kind profits in the near future, but I think they will continue to be extremely profitable. The owners who end up in trouble financially are the ones who screw up their personal lives or outside business ventures.

[Tracer Bullet]

And let's not forget that the owners get a tax write off on everything under the sun to add to their profits. These guys are smart, successful business men and none of them are losing money. That's why there's always lots of interest when a sports franchise goes up for sale.

 

I think you're overstating it. None of these people bought teams primarily to make money off them.

 

I think you're overstating it. I can't believe you know that there isn't any sports franchise owner who bought a team for the profit potential. I would guess that the overwhelming majority of owners bought primarily for profit/tax write offs as opposed to ego/bucket list.

 

You're mischaracterizing my post. I didn't say potential profit isn't a factor. I said profit isn't the primary factor. If they're great business people as you suggested, they'd find better investments if profit were the primary goal.

 

And buying a team for the tax write-off directly contradicts your claim that these are profit making machines.

[Tracer Bullet]

And let's not forget that the owners get a tax write off on everything under the sun to add to their profits. These guys are smart, successful business men and none of them are losing money. That's why there's always lots of interest when a sports franchise goes up for sale.

 

If someone's just looking for profit, there are much much better ways than a sports franchise. They do make money, but for these mega-rich guys, owning a team is more a bucket list type thing.

 

Bucket list type things are sailing to Tahiti, owning a sports franchise may be an ego thing, but it's extremely profitable. The Cubs were sold to the Tribune Co. in 1981 for $20.5 million and then sold to Ricketts for $900 million in 2009. If you know a better way to make that much profit, let me know. Some of the worst owners in sports end up selling for a lot more than they paid for a franchise.

 

Yet the Trib went bankrupt. You'd think with their investment expertise, they could have avoided such a fate.

 

I'm sure being in the Newspaper business had nothing to do with that.

 

There's probably a way to miss the point by a wider margin than you did, but I'm struggling to identify it.

[SouthSideRyan]

I feel like the Seinfeld quote about write-offs is getting overdone, but [expletive] if it's not needed A LOT

[Guest]

To be fair, that's a great quote.

[CarolinaCubFan]

 

Yet the Trib went bankrupt. You'd think with their investment expertise, they could have avoided such a fate.

 

I'm sure being in the Newspaper business had nothing to do with that.

 

There's probably a way to miss the point by a wider margin than you did, but I'm struggling to identify it.

 

Educate me please.

[Backtobanks]

And let's not forget that the owners get a tax write off on everything under the sun to add to their profits. These guys are smart, successful business men and none of them are losing money. That's why there's always lots of interest when a sports franchise goes up for sale.

 

I think you're overstating it. None of these people bought teams primarily to make money off them.

 

I think you're overstating it. I can't believe you know that there isn't any sports franchise owner who bought a team for the profit potential. I would guess that the overwhelming majority of owners bought primarily for profit/tax write offs as opposed to ego/bucket list.

 

You're mischaracterizing my post. I didn't say potential profit isn't a factor. I said profit isn't the primary factor. If they're great business people as you suggested, they'd find better investments if profit were the primary goal.

 

And buying a team for the tax write-off directly contradicts your claim that these are profit making machines.

 

Not when the tax write off maximizes your profits. One example is that a players' massive contracts can be depreciated over the "typical" length of a players' career.

[Conky]

 

Yet the Trib went bankrupt. You'd think with their investment expertise, they could have avoided such a fate.

 

I'm sure being in the Newspaper business had nothing to do with that.

 

There's probably a way to miss the point by a wider margin than you did, but I'm struggling to identify it.

 

Educate me please.

 

 

I wish i had the last 20 seconds of my life back.

[imb]

this is sort of off the tangent, but i really want cespedes and soler. hell, i'd consider the offseason a massive success if we got both and didn't get fielder.

[shnsajax]

this is sort of off the tangent, but i really want cespedes and soler. hell, i'd consider the offseason a massive success if we got both and didn't get fielder.

 

I feel the same way.

[CarolinaCubFan]

 

Yet the Trib went bankrupt. You'd think with their investment expertise, they could have avoided such a fate.

 

I'm sure being in the Newspaper business had nothing to do with that.

 

There's probably a way to miss the point by a wider margin than you did, but I'm struggling to identify it.

 

Educate me please.

 

 

I wish i had the last 20 seconds of my life back.

 

I still don't get it, I must be having one of those days haha. My point was the Cubs had nothing to do with the Trib going bankrupt. Must have missed the right off stuff, I'll go back to the bench now.

[KingCubsFan]

And let's not forget that the owners get a tax write off on everything under the sun to add to their profits. These guys are smart, successful business men and none of them are losing money. That's why there's always lots of interest when a sports franchise goes up for sale.

 

I think you're overstating it. None of these people bought teams primarily to make money off them.

 

I think you're overstating it. I can't believe you know that there isn't any sports franchise owner who bought a team for the profit potential. I would guess that the overwhelming majority of owners bought primarily for profit/tax write offs as opposed to ego/bucket list.

 

You're mischaracterizing my post. I didn't say potential profit isn't a factor. I said profit isn't the primary factor. If they're great business people as you suggested, they'd find better investments if profit were the primary goal.

 

And buying a team for the tax write-off directly contradicts your claim that these are profit making machines.

 

Not when the tax write off maximizes your profits. One example is that a players' massive contracts can be depreciated over the "typical" length of a players' career.

You can depreciate major assets in any business; this isn't exclusive for sports teams. You've failed to give any valid reasons or examples why someone would buy a professional sports franchise for profitability.

[Tracer Bullet]

And let's not forget that the owners get a tax write off on everything under the sun to add to their profits. These guys are smart, successful business men and none of them are losing money. That's why there's always lots of interest when a sports franchise goes up for sale.

 

I think you're overstating it. None of these people bought teams primarily to make money off them.

 

I think you're overstating it. I can't believe you know that there isn't any sports franchise owner who bought a team for the profit potential. I would guess that the overwhelming majority of owners bought primarily for profit/tax write offs as opposed to ego/bucket list.

 

You're mischaracterizing my post. I didn't say potential profit isn't a factor. I said profit isn't the primary factor. If they're great business people as you suggested, they'd find better investments if profit were the primary goal.

 

And buying a team for the tax write-off directly contradicts your claim that these are profit making machines.

 

Not when the tax write off maximizes your profits. One example is that a players' massive contracts can be depreciated over the "typical" length of a players' career.

 

That's not a write off. That's an expense. That's deducted from revenue to calculate profit. If expenses exceed revenue, then you've got no profit (but instead have a loss).

 

I don't know enough about the taxation of baseball team earnings and the finances of these owners to know if you can use the losses from a baseball team to lower taxable income from other sources, but it's pretty clear that you don't either. So maybe we should get back to talking baseball.

[Tracer Bullet]

this is sort of off the tangent, but i really want cespedes and soler. hell, i'd consider the offseason a massive success if we got both and didn't get fielder.

 

I completely agree with this. These guys seem to fit much more into the mantra of winning now and the future, so hopefully they're the top targets all along.

[ScrubMD]

And let's not forget that the owners get a tax write off on everything under the sun to add to their profits. These guys are smart, successful business men and none of them are losing money. That's why there's always lots of interest when a sports franchise goes up for sale.

 

If someone's just looking for profit, there are much much better ways than a sports franchise. They do make money, but for these mega-rich guys, owning a team is more a bucket list type thing.

 

Bucket list type things are sailing to Tahiti, owning a sports franchise may be an ego thing, but it's extremely profitable. The Cubs were sold to the Tribune Co. in 1981 for $20.5 million and then sold to Ricketts for $900 million in 2009. If you know a better way to make that much profit, let me know. Some of the worst owners in sports end up selling for a lot more than they paid for a franchise.

 

I'm not arguing that the value of the Cubs isn't much greater now than 1980, but to give it some context, the stock market was at 759 in 1980.