He got into coaching after he retired. He’s the pitching coach at BYU.Abe Alvarez had extreme pitchability, IIRC.
https://byucougars.com/staff/abe-alvarez
He got into coaching after he retired. He’s the pitching coach at BYU.Abe Alvarez had extreme pitchability, IIRC.
That's Wile E. Coyote, you Buchholz.Credit to us that old honest Abe Alvarez gets namechecked in the 2024 season rumors thread.
On the other hand, this is the highlight of the 2024 season rumors thread.
This is like when Wylie The Coyote notices that he has chased the Roadrunner off a cliff...
So Kennedy is going with the “ownership isn’t cheap, I’m just incompetent” approach. Interesting strategy.Article this morning
"This is not a profit-oriented business, the baseball business. This is a responsibility, a stewardship by John [Henry], Tom [Werner] and Mike [Gordon] to do everything they can to put a winning, great product on the field, and that will continue in 2024 and beyond.” - Kennedy
https://www.audacy.com/weei/sports/red-sox/sam-kennedy-red-sox-is-not-a-profit-oriented-business
This guy. I mean, he just needs to stop. This is not transparency, this is spin. Not only that but he's treating his customers like they're idiots. "This is not a profit-oriented business, this baseball business". Just fuck all the way off, Sam. Jesus.Article this morning
"This is not a profit-oriented business, the baseball business. This is a responsibility, a stewardship by John [Henry], Tom [Werner] and Mike [Gordon] to do everything they can to put a winning, great product on the field, and that will continue in 2024 and beyond.” - Kennedy
https://www.audacy.com/weei/sports/red-sox/sam-kennedy-red-sox-is-not-a-profit-oriented-business
Long time lurker here, but had to respond to this insane quote. John Henry bought the Sox for $660,000,000 million in 2001. 23 years later, it's worth roughly $5 BILLION DOLLARS. That is a 657.58% increase in value.Article this morning
"This is not a profit-oriented business, the baseball business. This is a responsibility, a stewardship by John [Henry], Tom [Werner] and Mike [Gordon] to do everything they can to put a winning, great product on the field, and that will continue in 2024 and beyond.” - Kennedy
https://www.audacy.com/weei/sports/red-sox/sam-kennedy-red-sox-is-not-a-profit-oriented-business
Geez... maybe I'm totally misreading or misunderstanding this.... but I'm reading this as him saying, "we'll put together a winning team, no matter the cost because it's not about profits..."This guy. I mean, he just needs to stop. This is not transparency, this is spin. Not only that but he's treating his customers like they're idiots. "This is not a profit-oriented business, this baseball business". Just fuck all the way off, Sam. Jesus.
That’s how I read it tooGeez... maybe I'm totally misreading or misunderstanding this.... but I'm reading this as him saying, "we'll put together a winning team, no matter the cost because it's not about profits..."
This is pretty much where I'm at with all of this. As someone who has supported this team in various ways for over 50 years, the last thing that I want to hear is that baseball is a non profit business. These fuckers are pretty much looking for ways to torch whatever remaining shreds of goodwill and trust that the fan base has afforded them.I really haven't joined the Kennedy pile on much, I think he's in a very tough position and is basically a human bulletproof vest...
However, what in the hell is that quote? Why in the world would you say that? It makes him and all of FSG look bad. Might be time to get Sammy K away from the microphone for a little while
Maybe? But owning a baseball team is about profits and always has been since the dawn of MLB. Practically every year the valuation of a MLB franchise rises by 8% (I may be off on this, but I think I'm in the ballpark -- no pun intended). Baseball has been and, always will be, a business. It's why so many rich people are lined up around the corner for a chance to purchase a Major League team. Maybe I'm overly cynical (shocking!) but to suggest otherwise is to completely fabricate a reality to your fans.Geez... maybe I'm totally misreading or misunderstanding this.... but I'm reading this as him saying, "we'll put together a winning team, no matter the cost because it's not about profits..."
Geez... maybe I'm totally misreading or misunderstanding this.... but I'm reading this as him saying, "we'll put together a winning team, no matter the cost because it's not about profits..."
If this is true (and it may be) the messaging and messengers surrounding this off season have been shit. Just when you think that there are no more rakes to step on someone from ownership/management steps up to the mic. I'll love this team until the day that I die, but if our differences can't be reconciled I might start seeing other teams.That’s how I read it too
I'm pretty used to business owners and shit... everyone lying. Players lie to the media about tons of stuff. Business owners too. This doesn't upset me at all. We know that nobody buys a baseball team wanting to take a loss but it's a borderline vanity project for a lot of owners too. I'm aware it's a business and profits are essentially what business is all about. I run a small construction company and while I seek to make a profit, I'm also very invested in making sure the product we make is top quality and I'm willing to lose some money at points and also to foster a good group of guys that work for me- and yeah, some of those guys are borderline idiots and not productive but they're fun to work with. Different situation but I can read what Kennedy said as the best possible bullshit. I'm not worried about someone lying when a microphone is in front of their face. I have to lie to clients on occasion on time frames, and sometimes just that I know what I'm doing! After all is said and done we make really good shit.Maybe? But owning a baseball team is about profits and always has been since the dawn of MLB. Practically every year the valuation of a MLB franchise rises by 8% (I may be off on this, but I think I'm in the ballpark -- no pun intended). Baseball has been and, always will be, a business. It's why so many rich people are lined up around the corner for a chance to purchase a Major League team. Maybe I'm overly cynical (shocking!) but to suggest otherwise is to completely fabricate a reality to your fans.
John Henry didn't "win it for ..." your dad or your grandma or your roomate. He won it all because it made the most financial sense (which, they byproduct is awesome for us--no argument on that). If the Red Sox were looked at as simply a baseball business, one that didn't need to turn a profit, the Sox would spend x times over their current budget. Every single year. Fines be damned. They wouldn't charge $15 for a beer. People wouldn't be secretly wishing that the Sox will suck so that you can get reasonably priced tickets on StubHub in September. They wouldn't tell you that half the fun of watching the Red Sox is sitting in a small-assed 112 year old ballpark.
This statement is a lie. A complete and total lie.
To somewhat piggyback on @John Marzano Olympic Hero above but it's more than that and more insulting than that.Basically all he is saying is we are trying to win. From his perspective, they fired bloom. They think they're smarter than everyone else and that signing the current free agents long-term hurts more than helps. Beyond that I'm not sure it's anything different than any of the other cryptic comments from Breslow et all.
You’re not wrongIf this is true (and it may be) the messaging and messengers surrounding this off season have been shit. Just when you think that there are no more rakes to step on someone from ownership/management steps up to the mic. I'll love this team until the day that I die, but if our differences can't be reconciled I might start seeing other teams.
I don't think this is true at all. Rich guys are lining up to buy teams because it's cool to say you own a baseball team. Anyone can buy a yacht or penthouse, but there are only so many baseball teams to go around.Maybe? But owning a baseball team is about profits and always has been since the dawn of MLB. Practically every year the valuation of a MLB franchise rises by 8% (I may be off on this, but I think I'm in the ballpark -- no pun intended). Baseball has been and, always will be, a business. It's why so many rich people are lined up around the corner for a chance to purchase a Major League team. Maybe I'm overly cynical (shocking!) but to suggest otherwise is to completely fabricate a reality to your fans.
To somewhat piggyback on @John Marzano Olympic Hero above but it's more than that and more insulting than that.
I mean, it's obviously a profit oriented business. Like that's such a blatant bold faced lie I can't believe he actually uttered those words. If it wasn't a profit oriented business the team would have close to a billion dollar payroll.
To say something this stupid is bad enough but to say it AFTER the offseason they've had, with talk about budget parameters etc., is honestly unbelievable. How stupid does he think people are?
When was the last time a rich guy wanted to lose money?I don't think this is true at all. Rich guys are lining up to buy teams because it's cool to say you own a baseball team. Anyone can buy a yacht or penthouse, but there are only so many baseball teams to go around.
Right. I think he poorly-expressed an attitude that most fans want ownership to have. "We understand that we have a responsibility to the fans not to place the bottom line ahead of the success of the team" or somesuch. I really dont get the Kennedy pile-on here. People seem to be taking a fairly innocuous statement and construing it in the worst way possible. (I understand that one shouldnt make statements that can be construed in such a way.)I think the more precise quote would be to say it's not about maximizing profits. I don't expect the team to have close to a billion dollar payroll because that would (I imagine) put costs way above revenue. That's not realistic. I don't expect them to lose money. I expect them to be in the break even/modest gain category.
How much are they actually *spending* on the "experience," though, versus just promoting it to a vomitous degree?The real kick in the nuts, at least as far as I'm concerned, is the part about Fenway Park at the end. FSG isn't alone in this regard, but they seem to be spending more and more and more toward the "amusement park" aspect of going to a baseball game and less on product on the field. It ties in with all the "Fenway Park experience" BS we heard earlier in the year. Continuing to get (and pander to) the tourists coming in from May - August is more important (at least in terms of where they're allocating resources) than the baseball team.
John Henry wouldn't be JOHN HENRY if he wasn't worried about making the most money that he can with every investment that he makes.
Yes, exactly. And for all the obfuscation and contradictions in the messaging and the rumors, the payroll numbers are public information and cannot be hidden from.I think its time to just stop micro analyzing every single thing this ownership group says.
It doesn't matter. If they decrease payroll by 10+% a year after finishing last place in the division coupled with 1) being way below the tax threshold and 2) having very little in the way of long term contracts - none of these words matter.
Listen to their actions.
Seriously? You've never heard insanely stupid wealthy people dumping tons of money into vanity projects or yachts? Or various other things that just lose money but that they really enjoy or love having their name plastered all over them?When was the last time a rich guy wanted to lose money?
No one wants to lose money (rich or poor), so to say that owning a baseball team (in particular the Red Sox) isn't about John Henry making money is bullshit. Plain and simple. John Henry wouldn't be JOHN HENRY if he wasn't worried about making the most money that he can with every investment that he makes. Again, this is fine and logical and clearly not what he has been doing for the last five years. Saying anything other than this is like an adult convincing their kid that Santa Claus is real despite being busted putting a bunch presents under the tree on Christmas Eve.
I wasn't talking to that point. My point was to Max that rich guys are lining up to buy MLB teams and don't care whether they lose money because it's "cool to say you own a major league franchise". John Henry didn't buy the Sox to look cool--I'm not sure there's anything John Henry could do to look cool, but that's besides the point. John Henry bought the Boston Red Sox because it was a sound investment and he (rightly) thought that his initial investment would pay off whenever he decided to sell the franchise.This just isn't true. I don't like the way this offseason has gone any more than you do. But up until this point, they have always spent right up to, or past the tax. If it was all about maximizing profits above all else we would not have seen Garrett Richards, the return of JBJ (and his salary), the payroll remaining above the cap last year, or any number of moves that were unlikely to generate any additional revenue.
Again, I don't like this offseason. But there are numbers between 1 and 10.
So you're contention is that John Henry bought the Boston Red Sox to lose money? Interesting theory.Seriously? You've never heard insanely stupid wealthy people dumping tons of money into vanity projects or yachts? Or various other things that just lose money but that they really enjoy or love having their name plastered all over them?
They don't say, "let's lose some money today on buying a digital media platform so I can scream at the top of my lungs and not get fact-checked" but they do shit like that all the time.
Agree. That is literally all that matters. Their actions say "we're not spending on the on-field product with impact players." Until they do otherwise, the words are meaningless. Not that what they've been saying has done them any favors.Listen to their actions.
Didn't they just spend a boatload on investment in "amenities" surrounding Fenway Park? I'm including that.How much are they actually *spending* on the "experience," though, versus just promoting it to a vomitous degree?
That's not what I said in neither my prior post or the other few in this conversation.So you're contention is that John Henry bought the Boston Red Sox to lose money? Interesting theory.
It would be nice but the next time the bolded happens around these parts will be the first.I think its time to just stop micro analyzing every single thing this ownership group says.
It doesn't matter. If they decrease payroll by 10+% a year after finishing last place in the division coupled with 1) being way below the tax threshold and 2) having very little in the way of long term contracts - none of these words matter.
Listen to their actions.
OK, but what BASEBALL teams do we abandon the Sox for? I really like Tampa Bay. The Orioles and the Dbacks are fun. But my heart is in Massachusetts.You’re not wrong
Based on the quote below, I think Kennedy is implying that ownership is willing to put profits back into the team and break even, but that finances aren't great and they won't put additional money into the Sox from other sources.Geez... maybe I'm totally misreading or misunderstanding this.... but I'm reading this as him saying, "we'll put together a winning team, no matter the cost because it's not about profits..."
“The way the industry of baseball works, we’re roughly a $12 billion industry. I don't have the exact numbers, but roughly 50% of the revenues go to player costs and the other 50% go to the expenses to cover the industry,” Kennedy said. “This is about a break-even industry, and that's really the focus. The revenues that get generated from our loyal fans, from people that watch on TV, people that spend their hard-earned money at Fenway Park on beer and hotdogs, that goes into player payroll. It goes two places: player payroll, and it goes into the renovations and preservation of Fenway Park.
“Around Major League Baseball, I can't speak for the other groups, but teams have an obligation to invest the revenues they generate into player payroll. That's what the Red Sox do. That's been our focus. That's not going to change. And that's really important that we honor that commitment to our fanbase.”
When producer Chris Curtis followed up by asking why player payroll is down if things like season ticket renewals are up, Kennedy said that the team’s finances overall are “not better” and again claimed that this is “not a profit-oriented business.”
Nobody's said it. You can believe rich guys want to buy sport franchises primarily for vanity while also believing they don't want to lose money on the venture. There are lots of ways for rich guys to make money, the demand for sports teams isn't because its the best way, it's because it's fun to say you do.That's not what I said in neither my prior post or the other few in this conversation.
Your husband knows the way.OK, but what BASEBALL teams do we abandon the Sox for? I really like Tampa Bay. The Orioles and the Dbacks are fun. But my heart is in Massachusetts.
Very funny, but he has rooted for your team for 73 years. Poor benighted bastard.Your husband knows the way.
I’m sure the money spent on Fenway to them included all the investment and development of the real estate that they are in the process of doing in the area. That work is expensive.How much are they actually *spending* on the "experience," though, versus just promoting it to a vomitous degree?
I thought a loose cannon was someone who said too much? He's the opposite, he doesn't really say anything. He just workshops PR phrases he thinks we want to hear, when in fact there is no combination of words that interest us.Kennedy is the ultimate verbal loose cannon. I've never seen anything quite like the show he's been putting on.
That’s not the part I was agreeing with lol. I was referring to the poor messaging.OK, but what BASEBALL teams do we abandon the Sox for? I really like Tampa Bay. The Orioles and the Dbacks are fun. But my heart is in Massachusetts.
Also when people think about profitability, that's the annual checks and balances. Henry surely knows that the real money is made in the franchise's valuation. Given that they bring in like $500m a year, the annual balance sheet probably never looks bad, but even a loss is relatively minor compared to the team's price tag. Meanwhile, all that stuff they're doing around Fenway is like putting an addition on your house, it will (almost) defo pay off in the end. But since it's baseball, winning increases the perceived and maybe actual value of the team too. So they can eschew "profits" out of one side of their mouth without taking their eye off making money.This just isn't true. I don't like the way this offseason has gone any more than you do. But up until this point, they have always spent right up to, or past the tax. If it was all about maximizing profits above all else we would not have seen Garrett Richards, the return of JBJ (and his salary), the payroll remaining above the cap last year, or any number of moves that were unlikely to generate any additional revenue.
Again, I don't like this offseason. But there are numbers between 1 and 10.
If this is true (and it may be) the messaging and messengers surrounding this off season have been shit. Just when you think that there are no more rakes to step on someone from ownership/management steps up to the mic. I'll love this team until the day that I die, but if our differences can't be reconciled I might start seeing other teams.
You’re not wrong
While I'm not well versed in these sorts of relationships, I'm not seeking divorce here. I'm thinking more in terms that perhaps I start seeing other teams as a way to satisfy certain needs while hoping to salvage what we have left together. A polyteamorous relationship if you will where MLB.TV will assist in my getting back into the dating scene.OK, but what BASEBALL teams do we abandon the Sox for? I really like Tampa Bay. The Orioles and the Dbacks are fun. But my heart is in Massachusetts.
This is a brutal but honest description of Red Sox owners. The honest part is that they are and continue to be willing to spending the revenue they make (huzzah!). In Kennedy's defense, There are some clubs that don't even do that. The brutal part is that nobody buys a sports team to turn an operating profit - breakeven is the BEST anyone could expect. Ownership of a sports franchise is all about the capital appreciation in the value of the asset over the ownership period ($660M to $5B as noted above)...and it's extremely tax efficient, taking operating losses along the way and paying capital gains only if /when sold. (Ignoring the usual real estate profit potential around the stadium/arena neighborhood!!!) The problem for Red Sox fans is that ownership is ONLY willing to do what Kennedy stated above. That is a change weather or not the y will admit it and its a tough stance when there are many owners that are willing and able to fund large annual operating deficits knowing the gain in value will more than make up for it. For whatever reason (i have my own theories) Red Sox ownership group has decided they are not willing or able to run deficits that would eat into the $4+ billion of imbedded profit/gain. Hence, brutal but honest.Article this morning
"This is not a profit-oriented business, the baseball business. This is a responsibility, a stewardship by John [Henry], Tom [Werner] and Mike [Gordon] to do everything they can to put a winning, great product on the field, and that will continue in 2024 and beyond.” - Kennedy
https://www.audacy.com/weei/sports/red-sox/sam-kennedy-red-sox-is-not-a-profit-oriented-business
There is plenty of room for you on the TB bandwagon. I can offer you cheap tix and all you can eat cuban sandwiches. You can be president of the fan club, too, if you want.OK, but what BASEBALL teams do we abandon the Sox for? I really like Tampa Bay. The Orioles and the Dbacks are fun. But my heart is in Massachusetts.
I agree with most of this, but the annual Forbes reports show plenty of teams with operating profits, too. Not that their numbers are all-inclusive or super-reliable, but we don't really have much in the way of public info on the profit figures.This is a brutal but honest description of Red Sox owners. The honest part is that they are and continue to be willing to spending the revenue they make (huzzah!). In Kennedy's defense, There are some clubs that don't even do that. The brutal part is that nobody buys a sports team to turn an operating profit - breakeven is the BEST anyone could expect. Ownership of a sports franchise is all about the capital appreciation in the value of the asset over the ownership period ($660M to $5B as noted above)...and it's extremely tax efficient, taking operating losses along the way and paying capital gains only if /when sold. (Ignoring the usual real estate profit potential around the stadium/arena neighborhood!!!) The problem for Red Sox fans is that ownership is ONLY willing to do what Kennedy stated above. That is a change weather or not the y will admit it and its a tough stance when there are many owners that are willing and able to fund large annual operating deficits knowing the gain in value will more than make up for it. For whatever reason (i have my own theories) Red Sox ownership group has decided they are not willing or able to run deficits that would eat into the $4+ billion of imbedded profit/gain. Hence, brutal but honest.
Emphasis added by me. I'd simply qualify this with a question about what is profitable? If the Boston Red Sox enterprise loses 25 million operating year after year, but the Franchise value increases 75 million year after year - that investment is growing by 50m annually. The 25m is cash money which needs to be funded while the 75m is in an appreciating asset (but non cash). The Oakland A's can't do this....even as the franchise value increases, the ownership group doesn't have the resources to fund operating losses (from my understanding).So you're contention is that John Henry bought the Boston Red Sox to lose money? Interesting theory.
EDIT: John Henry is not some benevolent grandpa who bought the Red Sox simply to sow seeds of happiness throughout New England. The sooner you get this reality through your head, the better you will be. John Henry is a very successful business man who cautiously weighs the pros and cons of his investments. He's not Elon Musk. He does not spend tens of millions of dollars on vanity things--at least I've never seen or heard of Henry purchases that fit this description. John Henry, has and always will, run the Red Sox (and the other holdings of FSG) as a business. The minute it stops being profitable, he is selling it off--no matter if he spends to the tax every year or not.
All available evidence has the Sox being profitable on a FCF/OM basis even without the financials of NESN included. Could it be wrong? I guess so, but there really isnt any evidence that that is the case. Given the lack of inclusion of NESN, its likely public estimates are conservative if anything. The reasonable conclusion is that they could easily spend $250-$260M in player salaries a year and still have a positive margin.I agree with most of this, but the annual Forbes reports show plenty of teams with operating profits, too. Not that their numbers are all-inclusive or super-reliable, but we don't really have much in the way of public info on the profit figures.