Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Forbes: Marlins Now Worth $520 Million, Up 16%

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Forbes: Marlins Now Worth $520 Million, Up 16%

    Miami Marlins team value rises 16 percent to $520 million

    BY DOUGLAS HANKS
    DHANKS@MIAMIHERALD.COM
    Marlins’ value rises 16% to $520M

    Despite a horrendous season with players and fans, the Miami Marlins approach Opening Day worth more than ever, according to Forbes.

    The financial magazine on Wednesday released its annual estimates on the financials of Major League Baseball, and the Marlins recorded a 16 percent gain to be worth $520 million.

    The boost came thanks to the gains that a team gets with a new stadium. But the bulk of the gain came from a rising tide generally lifting all teams. That includes a richer revenue stream from MLB’s television contracts, increasing dollars from MLB’s online ventures, and even an investment windfall from an endowment set up with proceeds from the league’s 2006 sale of the Washington Nationals, according to Forbes.

    Still, last season was a money-loser for the Marlins, Forbes said.

    According to Forbes, the Marlins now are ranked 26th out of 30 teams in the league in terms of franchise value. The best: the New York Yankees, with an estimated value of $2.3 billion. The worst: the Tampa Bay Rays, worth $451 million.

    The Forbes list probably comes at an unwelcome time for the Marlins, who are grappling with fan ire over owner Jeffrey Loria jettisoning star players after the team’s first season in a tax-funded ballpark. According to the Forbes list, just as Loria cut more than $60 million from the payroll, his team’s value shot up about $70 million.

    A rise in value does not mean an increase in cash, and the Marlins say horrendous ticket sales have left them losing money in recent years. Indeed, the Forbes ranking puts the Marlins’ operating loss at $7 million last year. The Marlins cut a payroll of about $100 million during last year’s losing season to about $40 million this year, according to team estimates.

    The fire sale of players came in response to big misses in revenue projections for the debut season in the new stadium. A 69-93 record made a bad situation worse, and the Marlins aren’t sure they can even sell out their home opener on April 8.

    A Marlins spokeswoman was not available for a comment Wednesday, but team executives have scoffed at the Forbes numbers in the past. Still, they’re considered a fairly reliable look at the pecking order on the balance sheet of professional baseball.

    According to Forbes, the Marlins brought in about $195 million in revenue last year, seventh from the bottom. The top was the Yankees at the $471 million and the bottom was the Rays at $167 million.
    http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/03/2...lue-rises.html

  • #2
    Interesting that Forbes has them with an operating loss.

    Comment


    • #3
      I do not doubt they lost money, but $40 million?

      Comment


      • #4
        Did they claim $40 million at some point during the offseason?

        Forbes has generally had the Marlins with an operating profit right? Or was it some other data point that they reported?

        Comment


        • #5
          Samson and other anonymous sources claimed $40 million in losses. Forbes has not had the Marlins in the red since atleast 2005 or 2003. I don't remember exactly.

          Comment


          • #6
            The Marlins told people in baseball that they lost $40 million in 2012, a figure that cannot be independently corroborated and one they know will invite skepticism
            http://miamiherald.typepad.com/sport...y-did-mar.html

            Comment


            • #7
              Thanks fellas

              Comment


              • #8
                Ticket rep who called me in January for renewals absolutely said they lost $40 million last year and that the figure was told to them by Samson in a sales meeting.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Beef, the Forbes numbers never include depreciation, would it be possible for them to have $30-35 in depreciation in one year and show such a large loss? Hanley and JJs contracts were at a point where a significant portion could be written off as depreciation.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I believe Mickey Arison also claims the Heat have lost money pretty much every year except the ones when they make the finals, so maybe we should not believe the things those guys tell us.
                    poop

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Arison has to show a loss to avoid paying the county rent.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        That's actually really interesting.

                        I want to look into that later - I don't know how the rules work regarding depreciation and player contracts (I know nothing of it). It seems like the rules may allow nearly the entire purchase price of a franchise to be written off during the first 15 years of new ownership. Curious what the rules are though and how they can be applied.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Party View Post
                          Arison has to show a loss to avoid paying the county rent.
                          I need my lease to work that way.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Beef View Post
                            That's actually really interesting.

                            I want to look into that later - I don't know how the rules work regarding depreciation and player contracts (I know nothing of it). It seems like the rules may allow nearly the entire purchase price of a franchise to be written off during the first 15 years of new ownership. Curious what the rules are though and how they can be applied.
                            They exist, Bill Veeck argued with the IRS for years about this.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Party View Post
                              I do not doubt they lost money, but $40 million?
                              That article said $7 million.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X