Quote from fenn68 on January 16, 2022, 12:07 pm

Quote from Personal Fable on January 16, 2022, 9:44 am

Quote from fenn68 on December 22, 2021, 6:30 am

So in reality the negotiation is a 3 way … therefore harder … between the union and the big clubs and the small clubs.

3 way negotiation that affects 4 parties. Public interest is most assuredly aligned closer to the owners side of things than players. While public sentiment is more aligned with players.

As a small club fan, the players union most certainly is an oppositional force to your interests.

 

Don’t think the owners (big or small) and union care about the fans who they want to extract the most money possible from. The negotiation is about the split of the total bounty.

To that end, there is a school of thought that revenue is maximized when the big market teams are the most successful … they not only have their local fans in greater numbers but also carry a lot of fans across the country (see NYY, BOST, CUBS) who push up the media ratings and merchandise purchases.

Now owners don’t want to spend to achieve max revenue (that goes for large and small markets) … so there is a bit of a balancing act with spending avoidance and insuring the big guys win while making sure revenues flow to them and not the players. They have been very, very good at those goals in recent history.

As I recall from a report, under the current CBA, if you don’t include the top 10% of contracts and the league minimum players, the pay for veteran ML players has DROPPED something like 40%. So the mega deals for the super-stars are sort of sparkling bobbles to distract from the fact that the mass of the union members are getting less (or being squeezed out buy league minimum types). Overall, league revenues are up by a much greater percentage than payrolls.

I can see the union point … the “sharing” of growing revenues is going the wrong way. People will  focus on the luxury tax (level and penalties) but that really impacts few teams. The bigger challenge is increasing the pay for those under the 6 year control (be it higher minimums and expanded arbitration eligibility) … or reduction of the 6 years to FA (which the owners will defend to the end). Basically get players to FA sooner or pay them better while under control.

 

 

Quote from Personal Fable on January 17, 2022, 11:09 am

Owners don't care, but it provides leverage.

The players union have been chasing those baubles for their entire existence. Which is why they are in such a precarious situation without leverage. They sold out minor leaguers. They sold out draftees. They sold out the International Free Agents. Then they finally sold out the league average vets.

They're not going to claw back rights and salaries they already sold down the river without giving up a big piece.

Quote from fenn68 on February 17, 2022, 8:32 am

Maybe just optimistic but IF the MLBTR report on the open issues with the owners and union positions is accurate ... don't see any real major structural issues in play. Basically the open issues (differences) can be reduced to dollars and cents and each side can (and likely will) move to a net middle ground ... not on each issue but overall.

So when ... I will still stick with my March 1 +/-  date. Despite the commentary that the players need at east a month to get ready and have to be in camp on March 1 ... guessing they either agree that 3 weeks is sufficient or push opening day back and reschedule the opening series (maybe to the end of the season) with commitment to play the full 162 game slate.

Additionally, if the players (and the union) don't have a game plan to get players into camp within 2-3 days of the deal ... not sure what they are thinking.

Players and owners really only start to lose major money if they don't play the 162 .... so still no "urgency" by either party to make a major compromise  ... just smaller strategic net concessions leading to the final agreement.

Frustrating for the fans but the reality of any negotiation where the parties are contentious. Both sides have "professional" negotiators behind the scenes ... that a could be good (they have a better sense of potential outcomes) for settlement BUT always a risk that the negotiators have their own egos (agenda) and dig their heals in until their clients (owners / players) push back.

Quote from BoosterSD on February 17, 2022, 11:08 am

The one thing that I saw on MLBTR, that could push the owners a little more, is that some of the stadiums here in AZ have clauses for monetary penalties if they dont play enough home spring training games. So there maybe a little more urgency on the owners here shortly depending on what those penalties amount to dollar wise.

Quote from fenn68 on February 17, 2022, 11:31 am

Quote from BoosterSD on February 17, 2022, 11:08 am

The one thing that I saw on MLBTR, that could push the owners a little more, is that some of the stadiums here in AZ have clauses for monetary penalties if they dont play enough home spring training games. So there maybe a little more urgency on the owners here shortly depending on what those penalties amount to dollar wise.

Also the owners lose money they would have made from attendance in those ST games ... on the other hand they save some from not having to run the facilities for the ML players (e.g. food, medical, etc.). Expect all this is small potatoes compared to the big money in play for all the other issues. Loose a little now for better payoff later when the pressure starts on the players (when they lose money).

Note: depends on the fine print but expect the ML clubs will have ST games in those stadiums starting in early March ... just with the minor league players. Pretty sure that will be an issue for the facilities with that clause in the contract.

Quote from Randy Manese on February 17, 2022, 11:34 am

My guess is that the owners end the lockout next week and the parties continue negotiating until the last possible moment, i.e., March 1st, whereupon a new CBA is signed.  Spring training is shortened and the season opens up as scheduled.  I'm ready for this to be OVER!

Quote from fenn68 on February 17, 2022, 1:24 pm

Quote from Randy Manese on February 17, 2022, 11:34 am

My guess is that the owners end the lockout next week and the parties continue negotiating until the last possible moment, i.e., March 1st, whereupon a new CBA is signed.  Spring training is shortened and the season opens up as scheduled.  I'm ready for this to be OVER!

Interesting idea ... end the lockout then run ST then if no agreement by opening day ... call another lockout? Assuming that is legit in NLRB rules.

Flip side ... owners end the lockout now but will the Union actually allow the players to report? Remember the players don't get paid in ST and if they believe the owners will re-institute the lockout before opening day are they actually losing leverage? Would that be considered a strike which has it own NLRB issues.

Really doubt the owners start the season without an agreement ... they remember 1994 when they played without a deal only to have the union strike in August shifting all the pressure on the owners.

Maybe not on our timeline but it will get done and the season will be played ... and all will be right with the world for the next 5 years.

Quote from fenn68 on February 20, 2022, 8:38 am

Bob Nightengale

Feb 18

New York #Yankees owner Hal Steinbrenner, Boston #RedSox owner John Henry, Colorado #Rockies owner Dick Monfort and San Diego #Padres vice chairmanRon Fowler are expected to be in attendance next week for the #MLB and #MLBPA negotiations.

============

Fowler is still in play for the Padres / League while keeping a low profile in SD.

This is a good sign given Steinbrenner and Henry are "heavyweights" among the owners and apparently Fowler is respected when it comes to deal making (he was a key in the last few negotiations). Having that group activity engaged next week should get the process really going forward ... and a better chance for a March 1 deal.

Quote from fenn68 on February 27, 2022, 3:53 am

OK getting to the 11th hour (per the owners) before the regular season is impacted … sides meet again today and expect so tomorrow. Reports APPEAR that the sides are far apart but always be wary of the public declarations … behind the scenes parts may move more easily to construct a deal.

As my former corporate labor negotiation kept reminding me … focus on the big picture of how the money falls in total and NOT each negotiation point. May give on a point that is viewed as victory for the other side if that is offset by gaining advantage some other less visible point(s).

Two issues are seem key:

1. Expanded playoffs … owners want to go to 14 teams and that would generate a ton of new revenue (players don’t really share this) and in their theory create an incentive for teams to push to be more competitive (sign better players) and make the playoffs given the increased chance. Union is arguing for a 12 team playoff and gaining some sharing of the playoff money (note that could be a gained by movements in other financial negation points). They do present the opposite view as the owners on going to 14 teams … basically that would be a dis-incentive for teams to spend to build a better roster since  it will become easier to make the playoffs.

I tend to go with the owners on the 14 teams … and expect they could get that IF they make some financial concessions on other points such as minimum salaries and Super 2.

2. Competitive Balance Tax. Owners have made an un- realistic proposal that does not raise the threshold (not even by inflation standards) and increased the penalties. Clearly meant to depress payrolls (which have been consistently dropping as a percentage of revenue growth). Union has the thresholds effectively $30MM higher in 2022.

The Union seems to have the high ground on this one since the owners are proposing stopping payroll growth in the face of record revenue growth.

=====

Other negotiation issues come into play but I could see (if we only look at these two) the Union agreeing to 14 team playoff (generating more money for the owners) as a trade-off for the CBT moving closer to their proposal (more money for the players). Think the owners are at $214MM (current level) and the Union at about $30-35MM higher … settle at about $230MM with a little more in minimum salary and everything may balance out.

The other issues probably then fall in line as they become dollar and cents pawns in “balancing” the sharing of the owners financial gain for expanded playoffs.

======

Guessing the “traditional fan” does not like the expanded playoffs … dilutes the both the regular season and the payoffs. However, for the “masses” with more teams vying for the playoffs and more teams in the playoffs … the entertainment value across the country is exponentially expanded … and baseball (any sport) exists financially based on maximizing entertainment value.