Revenue sharing

What are your thoughts so far? Also, I'll be adding projected revenue sharing for this season, and next in the current plan, and what increased revenue sharing for next offseason would be if that is voted before.

Just a reminder, revenue sharing WILL be done no matter what this offseason, but the vote is for what to do NEXT offseason..... stay the same, discontinue, or increase!

****there is an "expand" button in the bottom right corner that will make these pictures bigger, so make sure you click that.... ********

OK, here is my current estimate for revenue sharing...

https://2img.net/h/i157.photobucket.com/albums/t78/jclemen2/BASEBALL/2010revenuesharingestimate.jpg

These #'s are high on the payout amounts, because some of this money goes towards the prize payouts (16-20 million). Basically you received part of this already as a payout prior to the season. Just trust me, I know what I'm talking about. Also, I did one sim to get revenue #'s, here is how the playoffs worked out, as that is an important factor.... Mariners beat Twins 3-0, Orioles beat tigers 3-2, Orioles beat Mariners 4-1. Nats beat Giants 3-2, Mets beat Cards 3-0, Mets beat Nats 4-2. Baltimore beats Mets 4-3. Also I didn't increase playoff ticket prices, so that will raise some extra revenue.

Also, for the voting, the options are to continue (use this year's plan for next offseason as well) https://2img.net/h/i157.photobucket.com/albums/t78/jclemen2/BASEBALL/2010revenuesharingestimate.jpg

increase the amount to STEP 2 of the plan
https://2img.net/h/i157.photobucket.com/albums/t78/jclemen2/BASEBALL/2011revenuesharingestimate.jpg

or discontinue altogether.


Also, just as a note, I do change the calculations somewhat based on the numbers. This is due to how big of an impact the Yankees and Mets have ton this plan. Also if it get's to STEP 3, there will be a slightly bigger gap between the Yanks and Mets, which I think is fair, but isn't there now because of the Mets being actively run, and the Yanks not being, meaning they have more money available to pay.

I say keep it the same... obviously it would be best in my interests to discontinue rev. sharing but it is fair to the league for the most part... I don't think it needs to increase very much significantly yet... I just need to note that most of the teams getting significant rev. sharing help (aka Royals and such) are either GM'less or have very inactive GMs...

Give what we have another 2 or 3 years... (and also more time for me to do some contract swapping to lower my expenses under the 155 mark)

jcclemen2 wrote:

Baltimore beats Mets 4-3.

Stop dreaming

Even though I have been here for a short amount of time, I looked at the spreadsheets, and I feel that we should keep it the same. I think this plan should stay the same for a couple more years, then if necessary, you can revise it.