2012 Kansas City Royals Repository Thread

[alnorth]

2012 Slogan: Our Time

A better, more accurate 2012 Slogan: It is Finally Next Year
(from Great Expectations)

An alternative slogan if you don't like that one: Someone has to win this crappy division
(from alnorth)

With the beginning of a new year, it is time for the 2012 version of the Royals Repository Thread. We've got Hosmer, we've got a 2011-dominating Gordon, we've got Moose, we've got hopefully a killer bullpen, we've got a stereotypical slow slugging DH, we've got easily one of the best defensive shortstops in the AL, we've got a promising catcher in Salvador Perez. Hell, we've got offense and promising prospects galore.

We do not have starting pitching.

Oh yeah, we've also got this:



Get ready for, (as of January 2012 anyway), one of the most confusing puzzles of a baseball season in recent Royals history. Will they suck? Maybe, I don't know. Will we be given a year of 0.500 baseball? Possibly, I don't know. Will they win the division and go to the playoffs for the first time in 27 years? For the first time in a long time, it could happen, I don't know. 92 losses, 92 wins, or anything in between would not surprise a lot of us.

Everything goes here except Gameday threads and really big news. If a giant story breaks, the Royals achieve some awesome milestone, or we sign/lose a highly significant player/coach/mascot/whatever, then it might also deserve its own thread. This being Chiefs Planet, please do not clutter the board with new threads about trivial Royals news or you will only annoy those who come here for just Chiefs football. If you aren't sure and its not a Gameday thread, it goes here.

What sort of stuff often goes here? SPchief explained it well, so I'll just copy that:

If you locate something of interest.. ANYTHING.. deals on apparel, best ways in/out of the stadium, giveaways, great stories from this season or from seasons gone by, rumors, trades, anything.... feel free to post it here.

[Infidel Goat]

Originally Posted by Zeke

And for the record, i don't think Marcum, Sanchez or McCarthy will end up in KC, despite what we all hope for.

Do you think Marcum and McCarthy would cost that much more than Jurrjens? I guess I see one of those two as the happy mediator between bargain basement and Sanchez. I'd still prefer a trade for Dickey (if accomplished without Myers) and extend him for what he's asking. Dickey would probably pay for himself in increased attendance on dates he pitches anyway...

[sedated]

Originally Posted by Infidel Goat

Dickey would probably pay for himself in increased attendance on dates he pitches anyway...

Everyone on earth realizes this except the one person that matters. A competitive team means more $$$.

Glass has already said that the won't raise the payroll until we get 2 million in attendence (maybe it was 3 million). Completely backwards thinking.

[ChiefsCountry]

Originally Posted by alnorth

Regarding local TV, we get about $20MM/year from Fox Sports KC through the end of the decade.

The Cincinnati Reds, baseball's smallest market, figure to get, at worst, $50MM/year with their new deal, and maybe more if they have more than 1 bidder.

We signed our local TV deal at the absolute worst possible time, RIGHT before the value of sports on TV exploded.

Fox Sports is raping both Missouri teams on tv. Cardinals are only making 30 million if I read the Post-Dispatch right.

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho

I just don't see any way the $70 million/40 man mark is believable as the break even point.

$20 million a year for local TV rights (even though this is a shitty amount)
$25 million a year from current national TV rights
$70 million (low estimate) from revenue sharing. High estimate is $92 million.

I realize it costs a lot of money to run the stadium and pay for the support systems in the minors and latin america, etc.

But they're also selling 1.7 million tickets a year, at an average cost of over $30/ticket. That's an additional $50 million-plus.

Your average ticket number is really high. Its about $22. The revenue sharing number is impossible to believe, as well. Aside from online media, each team pays 33% of local net revenue, and that gets shared equally. Eventually half of the teams will be disqualified from receiving that, but not yet. Our share of revenue sharing is basically going to be 1/3 of the difference between our net revenue and the MLB average, plus our share of the luxury tax. Luxury tax isn't much.

edit: the revenue sharing will look dramatically different in 2016, and we should get another bump there. That should be another point when our break-even, whatever it is, goes up.

[duncan_idaho]

Dutton continues to post that Tampa wants Myers + for Shields and isn't budging. Thank god.

Trading for Dickey, if you can get him for something other than Myers, makes sense to me. Signing McCarthy makes sense. It seems like there is some cooling on Marcum because of declining velocity, and that makes sense.

[duncan_idaho]

Originally Posted by alnorth

Your average ticket number is really high. Its about $22. The revenue sharing number is impossible to believe, as well. Aside from online media, each team pays 33% of local net revenue, and that gets shared equally. Eventually half of the teams will be disqualified from receiving that, but not yet. Our share of revenue sharing is basically going to be 1/3 of the difference between our net revenue and the MLB average, plus our share of the luxury tax. Luxury tax isn't much.

edit: the revenue sharing will look dramatically different in 2016, and we should get another bump there. That should be another point when our break-even, whatever it is, goes up.

Revenue sharing totals, I was going off what I had seen/read from Forbes and the like (references to Forbes, etc).

I think I just got the wrong number attached in front of the 2 on the average ticket price (In my head). 32 also might have been the average cost of SEASON ticket sales (which would be higher than total ticket sales).

[alnorth]

Found this story from Stark. They estimate that the Royals probably get roughly $35MM from the revenue sharing component. He also notes that every single team must pay MLB about $10MM for pensions and other things.

I'm coming up with roughly $115MM before we pay anybody. Throw away $10MM, then subtract another $10MM for the draft and international bonus pools, and we're at $95MM. Between coaches, front office, scouts, rent to Jackson County, utilities, Arizona, debt service, whatever we have to pay for our share of stadium maintenance and upgrades, minor leagues, etc the Royals seem to be saying all of that stuff costs about $25MM before we get to the 40-man roster.

If that were true, I'd expect our 40-man breakeven to be about $95MM in 2014, and somewhere north of $100MM after 2016.

[ChiefsCountry]

I always figured Kansas City could support a 80 to 90 million dollar payroll for the Royals. That would be the number I would shoot for IMO.

[siberian khatru]

Originally Posted by alnorth

F
If that were true, I'd expect our 40-man breakeven to be about $95MM in 2014, and somewhere north of $100MM after 2016.

IIRC, Rany has said that the difference between the 40-man and the 25-man is about $2 million.

[alnorth]

If I were cynical, I'd say the Royals are going to use those expected future bumps as PR, "ok, we listened to the fans, we hear ya, we'll go above $90MM in a couple years, and who knows, we may even spend more than that when our young core get close to free agency and need extensions!"

[Bowser]

Originally Posted by siberian khatru

Bob Dutton ‏@Royals_Report

One reason #Royals are willing to trade Myers is they believe Jorge Bonifacio is pretty good. At least two years away, though.

And Frenchy rejoices. So do the Royals. Do you have any idea how much money they dumped into the "Frenchy Quarter" campaign?

Originally Posted by alnorth

Regarding local TV, we get about $20MM/year from Fox Sports KC through the end of the decade.

The Cincinnati Reds, baseball's smallest market, figure to get, at worst, $50MM/year with their new deal, and maybe more if they have more than 1 bidder.

We signed our local TV deal at the absolute worst possible time, RIGHT before the value of sports on TV exploded.

Pretty shrewd business men, those Glass boys. I wonder what their personal kickbacks are?

Originally Posted by alnorth

Found this story from Stark. They estimate that the Royals probably get roughly $35MM from the revenue sharing component. He also notes that every single team must pay MLB about $10MM for pensions and other things.

I'm coming up with roughly $115MM before we pay anybody. Throw away $10MM, then subtract another $10MM for the draft and international bonus pools, and we're at $95MM. Between coaches, front office, scouts, rent to Jackson County, utilities, Arizona, debt service, whatever we have to pay for our share of stadium maintenance and upgrades, minor leagues, etc the Royals seem to be saying all of that stuff costs about $25MM before we get to the 40-man roster.

If that were true, I'd expect our 40-man breakeven to be about $95MM in 2014, and somewhere north of $100MM after 2016.

Obviously you're not factoring in what Glass considers to be acceptable profit margin numbers. Sure, he could spend 100+ mil on a roster, but his yearly profits would plummet from a guaranteed 20+ mil to 5 to 10 million. Unacceptable!

Basically imo, and this is brand new information, David Glass is one cheap, greedy ****.

[Bowser]

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry

I always figured Kansas City could support a 80 to 90 million dollar payroll for the Royals. That would be the number I would shoot for IMO.

There is no reason at all the Royals couldn't hold a 100 mil+ roster, other than they don't want to.

Glass seemingly doesn't realize that the more successful you are in baseball, the more money you make.

[BWillie]

They're still sh*tty.

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by Bowser

There is no reason at all the Royals couldn't hold a 100 mil+ roster, other than they don't want to.

Glass seemingly doesn't realize that the more successful you are in baseball, the more money you make.

Well, if the miscellaneous costs did add up to roughly $25MM, another reason not to have a $100MM payroll is not losing money, and an unwillingless to float payroll or increase the debt.

[DeezNutz]

Originally Posted by alnorth

Well, if the miscellaneous costs did add up to roughly $25MM, another reason not to have a $100MM payroll is not losing money, and an unwillingless to float payroll or increase the debt.

Increase the debt? What debt.

How much of those misc. costs are attributed to front office payroll, specifically the financial obligations to the Glassholes?