glunn

If Forbes is correct, and the earnings before interest/taxes/amortization and depreciation were $30.2 million and the fair market value of the franchise was $605 million, then the rate of return was in the range of 5%. It seems to me that a rate of return of 5% is not very high compared with most private businesses. Yes, $30 million is a lot of money and might have purchased 5 or 10 more wins last year, but a 5% return seems reasonable to me. My sense is that regulated public utilities generally are allowed profits in this range. Am I missing something? Is there some reason to believe that keeping enough to result in a 5% return is in itself wrong? I understand that there are many who feel that the Twins should be spending at least 52% of revenue on payroll, and I am not trying to resurrect that argument in this thread. I am just wondering if a 5% rate of return seems unreasonable. I would note in this regard that based on the Forbes numbers, the most profitable teams were the Cardinals, Astros and Giants, and the highest rate of return by far was the Astros, at over 10%. Also, again assuming that Forbes is correct, the Dodgers, Phils, Yankees and other high spenders all LOST money. I wonder if this is because certain categories of revenues are being excluded. Can we have a friendly, respectful discussion of what these numbers might mean?

Nice blog, tobi, and some thoughtful responses. I still dream of Mauer being tried out at 3B.

It seems to me that we should be pleased that the Twins made this effort. It sounds like they are still trying to upgrade for this year, and willing to spend some money to do this.

If your premise is that it will take time to determine whether the Twins' moves have been effective, then I agree. It will make a great story (and make the FO look great) if Johnson pans out. I will be rooting for him.

I don't like the Russian incursion into Crimea, but can see the logic behind it. The elected president of Ukraine was sympathetic to Russia and was run out of the country by dissidents. Access to the Black Sea is strategically important to Russia. Most people in Crimea appear to prefer being part of Russia. It seems to me that these are logical reasons for the Russians to feel that they need to do something substantial. What I would like to know at this point is what role, if any, the CIA and other Western intelligence agencies played in the overthrow of the elected president of Ukraine. I am also hoping that this can be worked out peacefully, and that ultimately the people of Crimea get to decide which group of corrupt politicians will rule them. Is Putin really being a monster here, or are his actions at least somewhat understandable in light of Russia's aspirations to remain a major power?

Welcome, Noah!

Welcome, former lurker. The game threads are a good way to get your feet wet as an active poster.

The game is playing now on MLB channel in California -- 9:25 PST. We could have a west coast game thread if anyone else is watching.

What happened? Orioles score 5 runs.

I like the idea of providing housing and meals, especially housing. With some careful planning, I believe that the teams might be able to take deductions for the housing cost without the players having to pay tax on this, on the grounds that the housing is provided for the convenience of the employer. On the other hand, there could be interesting issues when MiLB franchises are moved, such a Beloit to Cedar Rapids. Ideally there would be some mechanism for swapping the housing facilities. I also think that this could provide a competitive advantage in terms of building team spirit, reviewing game videos at night and providing healthy meals, whirlpools and other therapeutic benefits. Finally, I am still not persuaded that the current compensation falls short of minimum wage. Also, I think that it's unfair for the MLB players union to make deals on behalf of "members" who are denied the right to vote for their leaders. Why aren't these factors persuasive?

Great post, AJ. Having fun promotes peak performance. Just don't let them talk you into exploring any caves. <br>[video=youtube;pWgc8Ute2tU]

1. Your response fails to address the fact that the owners of GM do not set the salary of the CEO, which undermines your position that such wages are set pursuant to the capitalistic principles that you espouse. In your post that I was responding to, you said: "When you own General Motors then you can make the decision to pay the janitors as much as the CEO I never suggested that a janitor be paid the same as the CEO. What I said was that the salary of the CEO is set by the board of directors, which is usually dominated by people who are cronies of the CEO. My point is that if the shareholders -- who are the true owners -- were allowed to vote on salaries, then I believe that CEOs would be paid less and janitors might be paid more. The system is rigged to prevent such votes, which supports my position that the rules are made by the people who have the most money. I am in favor of the owners/shareholders voting on the compensation of the CEO and other highly compensated managers. Are you in favor of this? 2. It is a clear violation of TD policy to characterize another poster's ideas as "ridiculous." We have infracted and banned other posters for this, and you need to either read and follow TD policy or you will be banned from participating in these forums. Obviously, most of us believe that what you are saying is dead wrong, but we have responded respectfully. If you wish to be part of TD, you need to follow the rules. You are new here and we have given you a lot of leeway, but we are all subject to TD policy, which you should read and consider if you have not already done so. As for the problem being more cultural than money, there are examples of good schools being provided to various minority groups and the students learning as much as in private schools. Where I live, we spend about $10,000 per year per public school student, and the tuition at private schools is in the range of $40,000 per year. If you have any evidence to support your statement that "More money per student is spent on low income areas than the highest end.", then please share this. 3. Are you actually denying that millions of children in the United States attend schools that you would never allow your own children to attend? No one has suggested tearing down any of the private schools that cost $40,000 or more per year. What I am suggesting is spending enough so that each child has an opportunity for a good education, even if such child has the misfortune of living in a poor area. 4. I live in California, but I have donated to Al Franken's campaigns, because I believe that he is an intelligent man who understands what is going on and who has more courage than the average politician. My understanding is that Mr. Franken wants to create millions of jobs repairing roads, bridges, and other infrastructure, all of which are in a sorry state of disrepair. Sadly, these programs have been blocked by the Republicans in Congress. I wish that someone could provide a logical explanation for not addressing unemployment by fixing infrastructure that is indisputably deteriorating. Yes, this might cost the Koch brothers a bundle, along with me and a lot of other people who should regard themselves as blessed to be in the top income tax bracket. But if we are going to remain a world power, then we need to maintain a strong infrastructure, and my intuition tells me that the Republicans are blocking this for political reasons, because they want unemployment high so that they can use this to garner support. Where do you stand regarding creating jobs to repair our national infrastructure?

The owners of General Motors are the shareholders, but they do not set the salary of the CEO. Such salary is set by the board of directors, most of whom are cronies of the CEO and the inside control group. We live in a world where wealth perpetuates itself. Kids born to wealthy families get excellent educations and have a relatively easy path to success. Kids born to middle class families have to work harder. And kids born to poor families tend to get poor educations and end up in poverty. This is a system designed by the rich, for the benefit of the rich. If we made the effort to make a great education available to poor children, then the system would be fairer. But as things stand now, it seems to me that the race to home plate lacks integrity when a handful of people start at third base and the vast majority start outside the stadium. I personally have benefited from this system, but the unfairness bothers me daily. As for liberals being more unfair to employees than conservatives, I challenge you to provide a shred of evidence for this. My anecdotal experience does not support this.

Speediest moderator?

Great article. Tony O will always be one of my favorite players of all time.

Good first game thread of the season. Thanks, everyone.

Its always great to see new people joining in a game thread.

I don't have access to the game, but am enjoying this thread. Nice work, everyone. If someone could throw in more tidbits about notable things happening on the field, that would be a godsend for those of us who don't have access to the game.

It seems to me that the biggest problem with pure capitalism is that it ignores any concept of fairness. Capitalism is an economic theory that is designed to maximize production. Before there were unions and before there was a minimum wage, millions of people lived in extreme poverty so that a relative handful of people could live in extreme luxury. Obviously, if given the choice between 20 cents an hour or starving, most people would pick 20 cents an hour. But who wants to live in a country where anyone is faced with such choices? I hate the idea of someone working 40+ hours a week and not being able to provide adequate food, clothing, shelter and health care for his or her family. To me, that seems fundamentally unfair. Is the CEO of General Motors really worth $20 million per year while a janitor is worth $20,000. Was it the janitors who caused General Motors to go bankrupt a few years ago? Was it really a good thing for the CEO to be able to be able to spend $2 million per year on a private jet while janitors' children died from lack of health care?

I have missed Brian's game thread introductions, and he did not disappoint.

With all due respect, it seems to me that the fact that young ballplayers can choose other career paths does not justify a regime that is inherently anti-competitive. What if all the hospitals and health insurance companies conspired to limit doctors' compensation to $50,000 per year? Under your theory, the best medical students could "choose" to work for hedge funds, until the hedge funds implement a similar monopolistic conspiracy. It seems to me that a union that fails to adequately represent its members is an abomination, and it is inherently unjust for an employee to be bound by a union contract if the employee has no vote. I understand that in order to maintain competitive balance, ballplayers must be locked into negotiating with whichever team owns the rights to their services, and must be prohibited from participating in a free market. However, it seems to me that the scales need to be balanced by allowing them to form a separate union where they get to elect leaders and vote on contracts. Then if the owners are not willing to make a deal, the owners can close their minor league franchises. I support free markets, but the current regime seems totally one sided and the opposite of free when it comes to minor league players. It seems to me that there should be a basic right to sell one's services to the highest bidder and that this is fundamental to capitalism and free markets. If such right is going to be suppressed in the name of preserving competitive balance among the 30 ballclubs, then there must be some mechanism for protecting the employees from gross exploitation.

Welcome new member. Are you a former minor league player?

Moderator note: this is a good thread. Let's not take it off track with sarcasm.

Moderator note -- let's please tone down the sarcasm.

Great thread! If only the Twins could have gotten more out of having the bases loaded in the first inning of that game against the Red Sox...