MLB Owners Support Thread

[orioles70]

Originally Posted by orioles70

Let's say your child has just graduated college with a 4 year degree and you have invested $100,000 in their education and they are lucky enough to be offered a job right now in this devastatingly tough working environment. Let's also say that job carries no risk of financial loss (the child needs to invest no capital to earn the salary) and the job comes with full benefits of health insurance, retirement, has union backing, and guarantees them $150,000/year (which is 50% more than the current salary that is considered very well off) for their next 40 working years (age 22-62) regardless of performance, sickness, etc.

I am curious to know how many people backing the players position would not advise their child to take that job.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

That was my post #441 about 5:30 PM 6-13-20

Nearly a day later and the response has been

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[brewtown107]

Originally Posted by KhalDrogo

CBA expires 12/31/21.


I take the MLBPA’s “tell us when and where to report” at face value. I don’t think they will strike. They agreed in March to give Manfred the power to force a season. If he does, they will play. They seem to think that Manfred’s forced season is the best option out of all the proposals brought forth by the owners. I am sure they have considered the possibility that Manfred does not force a season also.

They also agreed in March to renegotiate if games were to be played with no fans, and they fell short of doing that in good faith.

But you're probably right. There may be a few players who don't show up for the short season, citing (possibly false) health concerns, but the union as a whole will not strike now. The optics of that would be brutal for them.

[KhalDrogo]

Originally Posted by brewtown107

They also agreed in March to renegotiate if games were to be played with no fans, and they fell short of doing that in good faith.

But you're probably right. There may be a few players who don't show up for the short season, citing (possibly false) health concerns, but the union as a whole will not strike now. The optics of that would be brutal for them.

Ultimately, only the courts will decide if either side did not negotiate in good faith. And the likelihood of things getting to that extreme is small.

MLB had an opportunity to be the first back to action. They somehow managed to parlay that opportunity into the abyss that we all sit in now.

[brewtown107]

Totally agree that MLB blew a big opportunity here, but it's been apparent for years that the labor problems in this sport have been getting worse and worse. I'm not surprised by where we are.

[VandyCards]

Originally Posted by brewtown107

There are winners and losers in a capitalist society. ^This is what the losers always say. Congrats on being a loser.

I'm by all objective measures a winner in a capitalist society and I agree that most Americans have a subservient mentality. Bootlicking is a bit strong, but we don't have class consciousness in this country as exists elsewhere. The ruling class has been very successful in sowing division among the labor classes and segments.

[13goyankees13]

Originally Posted by brewtown107

The players have overplayed their hand in these negotiations (in my opinion) and if they push it to the point of a strike, I can totally see it being a make or break situation for the MLBPA. What could break the MLBPA? Young players and especially minor leaguers waking up to the fact that the MLBPA has done practically nothing for them, in the interest of enriching a few selected players and a bunch of undeserving player agents.

The MLBPA has negotiated an increase of over 1000% in the minimum salary when adjusted for inflation. They also negotiated for arbitration which ended the reserve clause. They won grievances against the owners for colluding to keep player salaries low and for refusing to offer future hall of fame free agents even a single contract. They negotiated all kinds of clauses about travel and allowances such as requiring first class seats and direct flights, getting hotel rooms to themselves, two different bus times from the hotel to the stadium each road game, $102 per day for food, even when a meal is served for free on a plane, and free ESL courses and sports psychologists. Just recently they negotiated an extra spot on the active roster.

In recent times the MLBPA has mainly focused on the free agents but everyone benefits from that they negotiated for back in the day. If the MLBPA breaks, most of those things that have been a part of baseball for 25+ years will go away.

[VandyCards]

Originally Posted by brewtown107

They also agreed in March to renegotiate if games were to be played with no fans, and they fell short of doing that in good faith.

But you're probably right. There may be a few players who don't show up for the short season, citing (possibly false) health concerns, but the union as a whole will not strike now. The optics of that would be brutal for them.

Whether this was agreed to or not is a subject of significant disagreement between the parties, at least as pertains to the prorated salaries issue.

I've negotiated a few agreements in my time, and by and large, any understanding so significant should've been commemorated in the agreement. It appears there is a May letter where MLB's negotiator acknowledges that the March agreement allowed for renegotiation, but that full prorated salaries was not part of the universe of terms that could be renegotiated.

As an aside, I don't see how anyone negotiating an agreement in March would've reasonably thought that games would resume in front of fans, or any serious number of fans.

[VandyCards]

Originally Posted by 13goyankees13

The MLBPA has negotiated an increase of over 1000% in the minimum salary when adjusted for inflation. They also negotiated for arbitration which ended the reserve clause. They won grievances against the owners for colluding to keep player salaries low and for refusing to offer future hall of fame free agents even a single contract. They negotiated all kinds of clauses about travel and allowances such as requiring first class seats and direct flights, getting hotel rooms to themselves, two different bus times from the hotel to the stadium each road game, $102 per day for food, even when a meal is served for free on a plane, and free ESL courses and sports psychologists. Just recently they negotiated an extra spot on the active roster.

In recent times the MLBPA has mainly focused on the free agents but everyone benefits from that they negotiated for back in the day. If the MLBPA breaks, most of those things that have been a part of baseball for 25+ years will go away.

The recent history of America is taking the achievements of the labor movement for granted, and then saying unions don't do anything, and then saying unions are ruining the economy.

[wcardguy]

Originally Posted by VandyCards

I'm by all objective measures a winner in a capitalist society and I agree that most Americans have a subservient mentality. Bootlicking is a bit strong, but we don't have class consciousness in this country as exists elsewhere. The ruling class has been very successful in sowing division among the labor classes and segments.

It is a fascinating and sad fall. Union membership peaked in the late 70s, which is also when real wages hit what has become a 40-year plateau. Corporations/big money interests saw this, and started buying politicians (you can guess which side of the aisle most of these politicians sat on) to convince people that the REAL enemy was their unions (i.e. their co-workers), and that management were the good guys. Since then CEO pay has gone from around 20 times of that of the average employee to around 300, and the inflation-adjusted rise in the stock market has been about 600%. All while your real wages have been completely flat. It ain't rocket science.

[gradedeflator]

there no grown ups in this "room" between MLB and MLBPA. i think Manfred sucks, but Tony Clark does too. Sigh. and we fans pay the price.

if I'm the owner of any team that had a legit chance to win this year - Dodgers, Yankees, Astros, Nationals, etc. - i would be really pissed about a 48 or 52 game season. There's to too much randomness that can happen in a shortened season (Eno Sarris recently posted a great read suggesting normalizatoin occurs after 60 games). If one of those teams misses the playoffs due to a freak bad span of play, an injury to a key player, and a team like Orioles wins it all, i'd be pissed.

The good teams should be pushing Manfred and other owners for a longer season to bring more credibility to the final outcome. and also avoid any random negative events.

[brewtown107]

Originally Posted by 13goyankees13

The MLBPA has negotiated an increase of over 1000% in the minimum salary when adjusted for inflation. They also negotiated for arbitration which ended the reserve clause. They won grievances against the owners for colluding to keep player salaries low and for refusing to offer future hall of fame free agents even a single contract. They negotiated all kinds of clauses about travel and allowances such as requiring first class seats and direct flights, getting hotel rooms to themselves, two different bus times from the hotel to the stadium each road game, $102 per day for food, even when a meal is served for free on a plane, and free ESL courses and sports psychologists. Just recently they negotiated an extra spot on the active roster.

In recent times the MLBPA has mainly focused on the free agents but everyone benefits from that they negotiated for back in the day. If the MLBPA breaks, most of those things that have been a part of baseball for 25+ years will go away.

None of this benefits the minor league players, and in any case, why would all of this go away? It's all small potatoes stuff that ownership should be happy to keep in place if they could possibly get some relief on the bigger issue, which is that current players get 50% or more of the gross revenue pie, and the rest, which supposedly goes to the "owners" actually goes to pay all of the other staff and cover all of the other expenses to run the team. The players' percentage is too high. That's the issue. They get that much of the pie, and then tell the owners their profits (which may or may not even exist after all the expenses) are too high.

[VandyCards]

Originally Posted by brewtown107

None of this benefits the minor league players, and in any case, why would all of this go away? It's all small potatoes stuff that ownership should be happy to keep in place if they could possibly get some relief on the bigger issue, which is that current players get 50% or more of the gross revenue pie, and the rest, which supposedly goes to the "owners" actually goes to pay all of the other staff and cover all of the other expenses to run the team. The players' percentage is too high. That's the issue. They get that much of the pie, and then tell the owners their profits (which may or may not even exist after all the expenses) are too high.

MLBPA doesn't represent minor leaguers. Minor leaguers are actually trying to take the jobs of those that the MLBPA represents. It is a weird dynamic, considering, minor leaguers will eventually become MLBPA bargaining unit members, if their careers work out.

*minor leaguers=guys not on 40-man roster.

[jhssketchcards]

Originally Posted by JustinVerlander07

You seem to underestimate how many people will not watch with replacement players who are far inferior to the current crop of major leaguers. Nobody wants to watch a bad product.

Certain collectors would go nuts if the recent Bowman prospects all of the sudden were major leaguers playing. Card prices would skyrocket and people would want to see what these “can’t misses” can do. People are so starved for sports they could put anyone out there and people would watch.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[brewtown107]

Originally Posted by VandyCards

I'm by all objective measures a winner in a capitalist society and I agree that most Americans have a subservient mentality. Bootlicking is a bit strong, but we don't have class consciousness in this country as exists elsewhere. The ruling class has been very successful in sowing division among the labor classes and segments.

What some call class consciousness, others call instigating class warfare. I work with capitalist winners all the time, and the fact is many of them are self made. Instead of sitting around complaining about how much everyone else has, they put the time and effort in and got their own.

Life isn't fair, of course. Some were born with more resources or more ability (cognitive, athletic, artistic) and some had to overcome significant obstacles. Hell, even health isn't guaranteed to anybody.

But people tend to be happiest when they go out and earn and enjoy what they have, and don't worry about what everyone else has. People tend to be unhappiest when they pit themselves against others and decry all the unfairness that leaves them short of what those others have. That's a miserable way to live, no matter how little or how much you have.

Originally Posted by VandyCards

Whether this was agreed to or not is a subject of significant disagreement between the parties, at least as pertains to the prorated salaries issue.

I've negotiated a few agreements in my time, and by and large, any understanding so significant should've been commemorated in the agreement. It appears there is a May letter where MLB's negotiator acknowledges that the March agreement allowed for renegotiation, but that full prorated salaries was not part of the universe of terms that could be renegotiated.

As an aside, I don't see how anyone negotiating an agreement in March would've reasonably thought that games would resume in front of fans, or any serious number of fans.

I haven't reviewed the details of the agreement, but apparently there's something in there about it. Generally speaking, language in an agreement, even if it's ambiguous, is not read as if it's not there at all.

Regarding the aside, it's plenty credible that people thought fans could be in attendance at some point in the season, back in March before this thing really blew up stateside.

If the language is really that ambiguous, seems likely to me that it's because both parties wanted it that way. This meant they could reach some kind of agreement at the time without actually formally deciding that particular sticky issue, and each side had a way to spin the meaning of the vague language after the fact, as we're seeing now.

Originally Posted by VandyCards

The recent history of America is taking the achievements of the labor movement for granted, and then saying unions don't do anything, and then saying unions are ruining the economy.

A century ago, my great grandfather was a union organizer in Chicago, back when unions mattered. I respect what early unions fought for.

But we've come a long way, and nowadays we have unions fighting for millionaire baseball players--most of whom are also individually represented by agents--to get those poor exploited workers paid per diems on top of their free post game meals and non-stop first class airline flights. Maybe the whole union thing has worn out its usefulness, at least in some industries.

[brewtown107]

Originally Posted by VandyCards

MLBPA doesn't represent minor leaguers. Minor leaguers are actually trying to take the jobs of those that the MLBPA represents. It is a weird dynamic, considering, minor leaguers will eventually become MLBPA bargaining unit members, if their careers work out.

*minor leaguers=guys not on 40-man roster.

Obviously. But let's keep track of the discussion. Some were saying the minor leaguers will never cross the union picket line, and my point was that they might, considering the union has done nothing for them. These benefits were mentioned to counter my point. But we agree that the minor league players are not part of the union. They don't get these benefits.

[base set]

Salaries have peaked, in my opinion. Cable operators won't be able to bid as high for rights packages as more and more people purchase video entertainment a la carte. Non-fans pumped in a lot of money via bundled channels they had to purchase in the past.

There is more than enough customer money to go around for everyone. Moving the sport to a purely pay-per-view basis (already underway) will not grow it. Both 'sides' arguing over who gets which slice of the pie during an oncoming major Recession will just result in less customer money coming in, and a smaller pie to fight over.

In many hotel rooms one might happen to rent for an evening, you can no longer watch a baseball game. Go to a non-dedicated sports bar and ask to watch a baseball game and the response is "are you sure it's on TV?" & "what channel" - those places won't be paying the fees to offer baseball viewing to customers when not enough customers ask to watch baseball any more.

MLB attendance has been ticking down slowly since 2012. But revenues are up. How long can that equation continue?

[VandyCards]

Originally Posted by brewtown107

What some call class consciousness, others call instigating class warfare. I work with capitalist winners all the time, and the fact is many of them are self made. Instead of sitting around complaining about how much everyone else has, they put the time and effort in and got their own.

Life isn't fair, of course. Some were born with more resources or more ability (cognitive, athletic, artistic) and some had to overcome significant obstacles. Hell, even health isn't guaranteed to anybody.

But people tend to be happiest when they go out and earn and enjoy what they have, and don't worry about what everyone else has. People tend to be unhappiest when they pit themselves against others and decry all the unfairness that leaves them short of what those others have. That's a miserable way to live, no matter how little or how much you have.



I haven't reviewed the details of the agreement, but apparently there's something in there about it. Generally speaking, language in an agreement, even if it's ambiguous, is not read as if it's not there at all.

Regarding the aside, it's plenty credible that people thought fans could be in attendance at some point in the season, back in March before this thing really blew up stateside.

If the language is really that ambiguous, seems likely to me that it's because both parties wanted it that way. This meant they could reach some kind of agreement at the time without actually formally deciding that particular sticky issue, and each side had a way to spin the meaning of the vague language after the fact, as we're seeing now.



A century ago, my great grandfather was a union organizer in Chicago, back when unions mattered. I respect what early unions fought for.

But we've come a long way, and nowadays we have unions fighting for millionaire baseball players--most of whom are also individually represented by agents--to get those poor exploited workers paid per diems on top of their free post game meals and non-stop first class airline flights. Maybe the whole union thing has worn out its usefulness, at least in some industries.

I think the stuff ownership is trying to pull evidences the need for the union. Less about raw income numbers than the significant imbalance of power and owner collusion.

Certainly agents help, but agents don't represent all players. Indeed, they couldn't, I don't think, without a massive conflict of interest problem.

[CalCub]

Originally Posted by ScooterD

This is a two-sided issue, and there have been other people on this thread who have supported your side effectively.

You, on the other hand, have not done so. Your tone has been insulting, incendiary, and condescending. Your verbiage and speech patterns have been repetitive, pressured, and elementary. Your arguments have been varied, circular, and contradicting. And your grammar sucks.

You say that you are passionately debating - you aren’t. You are trolling and flaming people in an attempt to garner attention. Your tactics would not be successful or accepted in any known forum. If you were a litigator, the judge would hold you in contempt upon your introduction.

If I had to guess, you are a college student who is related to a business owner. You have been exposed to concepts enough to know certain terms, but you don’t know how to effectively or efficiently use what little you know to make a valid argument. The rest is immaturity.

If I’m wrong, and you do own/run/manage a business, the people who work for you despise you. Like Larry from shipping and receiving. He and his wife are always so nice at the Christmas party.... yea, Larry hates your guts.

Sorry, but I've received a lot of good feedback both on this thread and in PMs that my OP does a great job explaining how the owners are the only ones trying to compromise to give the fans the best baseball season possible. And it's not my problem that you're a sensitive person that gets their feelings hurt on a chat forum as easily as you do from debating issues like this.

Again, funny how you're trying to call me a troll on a thread that was created by me....it's like the new trolling, is loosely calling others trolls, and that's exactly what you're doing here. Just because I'm a strong debater does not make me a troll, and if you keep it up I'll put you on ignore, don't need to read your constant lectures about my "tone"....I am who I am, and definitely add more value to this forum than you do.

[tier1dc]

Originally Posted by CalCub

Sorry, but I've received a lot of good feedback both on this thread and in PMs that my OP does a great job explaining how the owners are the only ones trying to compromise to give the fans the best baseball season possible. And it's not my problem that you're a sensitive person that gets their feelings hurt on a chat forum as easily as you do from debating issues like this.

Again, funny how you're trying to call me a troll on a thread that was created by me....it's like the new trolling, is loosely calling others trolls, and that's exactly what you're doing here. Just because I'm a strong debater does not make me a troll, and if you keep it up I'll put you on ignore, don't need to read your constant lectures about my "tone"....I am who I am, and definitely add more value to this forum than you do.

you're a psycho.

You are who you are and that's a stone cold idiot.

[CalCub]

Originally Posted by brewtown107

Isn't this what Frank McCourt did with the Dodgers? I think so, and everyone hated it. And rightly so. Terrible business practice. But people want owners to run their teams at a loss, which is terrible business practice, and risks situations where they can't make payroll when times are bad. And look at right now. Times are bad, some teams can't make payroll, and the union response is "we don't believe you that the loss of all gate receipts is an economic hardship, show us the books on all your business activities, you're surely hiding the revenues from those (empty) restaurants and parking garages near the stadium.

Exactly....I think this MLB labor dispute has exposed the people in the general public who have good business acumen and who are able to put common business sense before their personal admiration for their favorite players they like to follow...vs. people in the general public who have this flaky attitude that all business owners evil greedy people & who think the players that they admire so much are entitled to whatever they ask for.

I have a lot of players I admire & like to follow, but I'm not going to let people I like take advantage of me. That's why several members of this forum have sent me PMs thanking me for breaking things down in the OP to try and help the general population understand the situation with the MLB labor dispute better.

Haha and yes, great follow up by you to my point how these fans want the owners to completely bailout the players as much as possible at all costs, yet if these same MLB owners took cash/assets from the team to put into their other business, these same people who have been siding with the players would seriously freak out and shame the "greedy evil owners" to taking from the team

[CalCub]

Originally Posted by tier1dc

you're a psycho.

You are who you are and that's a stone cold idiot.

The difference between me and you is, if I called you an idiot, you'd probably get your feelings hurt & report me....I don't care what you say, you've proven on this thread you have no credibility....why don't you go roam around in a 50 mile radius to all the Targets & Walmarts in your area and check to see if there's any Mega Boxes or something

[SaltyCracker]

Originally Posted by ScooterD

This is a two-sided issue, and there have been other people on this thread who have supported your side effectively.

You, on the other hand, have not done so. Your tone has been insulting, incendiary, and condescending. Your verbiage and speech patterns have been repetitive, pressured, and elementary. Your arguments have been varied, circular, and contradicting. And your grammar sucks.

You say that you are passionately debating - you aren’t. You are trolling and flaming people in an attempt to garner attention. Your tactics would not be successful or accepted in any known forum. If you were a litigator, the judge would hold you in contempt upon your introduction.

If I had to guess, you are a college student who is related to a business owner. You have been exposed to concepts enough to know certain terms, but you don’t know how to effectively or efficiently use what little you know to make a valid argument. The rest is immaturity.

If I’m wrong, and you do own/run/manage a business, the people who work for you despise you. Like Larry from shipping and receiving. He and his wife are always so nice at the Christmas party.... yea, Larry hates your guts.

[CalCub]

Originally Posted by brewtown107

Right now, the players are pissed, and I'll bet they're discussing whether to show up for a 48 game season "imposed" by the commissioner, who is an employee of the owners. If they don't show up, they're on strike.

If they go on strike for this 48 game season, and don't get what they want, do they show up next season and act like nothing happened? Or do they stay on strike? Especially if nobody gets paid in the off-season in free agency, which is pretty much a given at this point.

The players have overplayed their hand in these negotiations (in my opinion) and if they push it to the point of a strike, I can totally see it being a make or break situation for the MLBPA. What could break the MLBPA? Young players and especially minor leaguers waking up to the fact that the MLBPA has done practically nothing for them, in the interest of enriching a few selected players and a bunch of undeserving player agents.

I think it's time to bust the MLBPA union...the players union has done a lot of great things for the players in the last 10-20 years where all MLB players are getting paid very well now...but now it's gotten to the point where the union is being greedy....and we have all seen the damages that greedy unions do to businesses...the most recent example that comes to mind is the autoworkers union that got so greedy, they made it very tough for American auto companies like General Motors to compete in the market.

There's already a decent % of people in the public that understand the MLBPA has been greedy & acting in bad faith during these current labor negotiations....and if the MLBPA keeps it up, more & more people in the public are going to start to realize, that these players that they admire so much, aren't completely innocent

[CalCub]

Originally Posted by 13goyankees13

The MLBPA has negotiated an increase of over 1000% in the minimum salary when adjusted for inflation. They also negotiated for arbitration which ended the reserve clause. They won grievances against the owners for colluding to keep player salaries low and for refusing to offer future hall of fame free agents even a single contract. They negotiated all kinds of clauses about travel and allowances such as requiring first class seats and direct flights, getting hotel rooms to themselves, two different bus times from the hotel to the stadium each road game, $102 per day for food, even when a meal is served for free on a plane, and free ESL courses and sports psychologists. Just recently they negotiated an extra spot on the active roster.

In recent times the MLBPA has mainly focused on the free agents but everyone benefits from that they negotiated for back in the day. If the MLBPA breaks, most of those things that have been a part of baseball for 25+ years will go away.

Look at your long list of great achievements the MLBPA has done in the past for the players...yet you still think the players are getting screwed by the owners today??? You need to understand that during these labor negotiations from the Covid pandemic, the players union has crossed the line into greedy territory, where they care more about money than the fans & their own team's financial health

[CalCub]

Originally Posted by base set

Salaries have peaked, in my opinion. Cable operators won't be able to bid as high for rights packages as more and more people purchase video entertainment a la carte. Non-fans pumped in a lot of money via bundled channels they had to purchase in the past.

There is more than enough customer money to go around for everyone. Moving the sport to a purely pay-per-view basis (already underway) will not grow it. Both 'sides' arguing over who gets which slice of the pie during an oncoming major Recession will just result in less customer money coming in, and a smaller pie to fight over.

In many hotel rooms one might happen to rent for an evening, you can no longer watch a baseball game. Go to a non-dedicated sports bar and ask to watch a baseball game and the response is "are you sure it's on TV?" & "what channel" - those places won't be paying the fees to offer baseball viewing to customers when not enough customers ask to watch baseball any more.

MLB attendance has been ticking down slowly since 2012. But revenues are up. How long can that equation continue?

Funny how you bring up peak salaries...because if you look at how these labor negotiations have been going, the MLBPA keeps insisting on seeing "the books"....why? Because players high salaries are already stressing the system enough, so they only way player salaries can keep going higher is if they look into the books to see exactly what profit margins % are, so they can squeeze those even further to the point where the owners might get lucky if they break even.

Not only that, but seems like the players are also to get compensated from other non traditional revenue streams from the organisation/owners, which is a sign that salaries have indeed peaked to the point where the players union is looking at new creative ways to get more money from the team owners & fans who ultimately pay their salaries