jaymoney, thanks for the articles. If you're going to make these arguements, we expect your "A" game. Any thing less and the membership stops taking you seriously, both in this thread and out on the rest of the board.
I read the Forbes articles linked in the blog post, and I'm pretty sure that you didn't. If you had, you'd recognize that there's a major difference between "operating income" and "profit". All the line items that are added together to create "operating income" are positive numbers. There are significant negative numbers (the money the organization pays out) in the formula for "profit". Here's the definition of "operating income" that Forbes uses:
Quote:
Revenues and operating income are for 2008 season.
1Value of team based on current stadium deal (unless new stadium is pending) without deduction for debt (other than stadium debt).
2Includes stadium debt.
3Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization.
NA: Not applicable.
|
What's not included? Well, #3 is going to be a huge negative number for most franchises, especially if they've changed hands in the last few years.
For those of you who want to read the whole report, here it is:
Baseball's Most Valuable Teams - Forbes.com
jaymoney, you're using VERY specific accounting terms to describe an accounting issue. Are you sure you're know enough about the meaning of the words you're using to make your argument? You're confusing two things -
profit and
operating income - and they're very different things. You started out talking about profit and seem to assume that operating income is synonymous with profit. It's not.
As far as the truth hurting, well, once you figure out what argument you really want to make, you let us know. For now, I'll just keep pointing to the numbers and the definitions of the terms used to arrive at those numbers and ask you which parts you need explained to you.