Interesting. MLB team revenue and percentage of their revenue for team payroll.
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Interesting. MLB team revenue and percentage of their revenue for team payroll.
View attachment 7150707
Really? A’s payroll 84MIf those numbers are real, never tell me again that small market teams can't compete.
Really? A’s payroll 84M
11 teams under 150M
Ohtani, 70M
Soto 51M
I can see it
But that would have been one less nickel in John Fisher's pocket and not a big enough fu to A's fans.A's 2023 revenue was $241 million. They spent $84 million in 2024. Yes, they could have afforded Ohtani or Soto.
Yes but there other operating cost beside payrollA's 2023 revenue was $241 million. They spent $84 million in 2024. Yes, they could have afforded Ohtani or Soto.
Definitely bad ownerBut that would have been one less nickel in John Fisher's pocket and not a big enough fu to A's fans.
Very true. It costs a lot to rip the hearts out of an entire fan base.Yes but there other operating cost beside payroll
That whole deal sucked and I’m not even an A’s fanVery true. It costs a lot to rip the hearts out of an entire fan base.
Not when you are now able to amortize a player's salary over 30 years. I exaggerate, but seriously? The Dodgers payroll in real-word dollars for the next 15 seasons is close to NASA's budget? C'mon. Salary cap is a played out joke.Obviously the cap penalty is no deterrent
From what I have read and seen on TV, the A's, stadium in Oakland was extremely rundown and the city did not want to make the improvements to bring it up to par. That was one of the reasons to move the team.A's 2023 revenue was $241 million. They spent $84 million in 2024. Yes, they could have afforded Ohtani or Soto.
From what I have read and seen on TV, the A's, stadium in Oakland was extremely rundown and the city did not want to make the improvements to bring it up to par.
From what I have read and seen on TV, the A's, stadium in Oakland was extremely rundown and the city did not want to make the improvements to bring it up to par. That was one of the reasons to move the team.
I am just repeating what was reported on the sports news. That's all I know about it. Also, if I recall correctly, they said game attendance was way down from the previous decade.All I can say is the city gave Fisher everything he wanted multiple times and it was never good enough because he never wanted to stay. The A's are not paying any rent in Sacramento. I highly doubt Vegas ever happens.
Sure. If the owner doesn't field a team worth seeing is it the public's fault? Fisher and Kaval had been gutting that team in anticipation of this move for many years now.Also, if I recall correctly, they said game attendance was way down from the previous decade.
I am just repeating what was reported on the sports news. That's all I know about it. Also, if I recall correctly, they said game attendance was way down from the previous decade.