Lauer not happy with “bites of apple” approach

[jjgott]

While I certainly understand the "many bites of the apple" approach, I worry that with the expanded playoffs, we may end up like the late-era Kohl Bucks teams that did just enough to get a 7 or 8 seed.  It helped the bottom line of the owners to say we were a playoff team, but the Bucks couldn't truly compete against the top of the league.  Look what happened to the Bucks when Edens/Lasry decided to pay the luxury tax.

 

Mark A. says there's always money for moves to improve the team, but outside of 2018, it always seems like we are just nibbling around the edges.  I can sympathize with Lauer's frustration because the current players may not be around for those "bites of the apple." They want to win now.  And frankly, so do I.

 

Mark A. has earned the benefit of the doubt that he will never truly strip the team bare like the Orioles or Pirates, but I remain skeptical he'll do what needs to be done to truly contend for a championship.  I think he's very comfortable making the wild card game and saying aw shucks when we get beat by the Braves or Dodgers.

 

Right now we have a lower payroll than what we had in 2012 (in today's dollars), even though revenues have gone up tremendously over the last 10 years.  We were a top 10 payroll in 2012.  No reason why we can't be a top 10 payroll if we wanted to truly contend. 

 

[wntrtxn21]

1 hour ago, jjgott said:

While I certainly understand the "many bites of the apple" approach, I worry that with the expanded playoffs, we may end up like the late-era Kohl Bucks teams that did just enough to get a 7 or 8 seed.  It helped the bottom line of the owners to say we were a playoff team, but the Bucks couldn't truly compete against the top of the league.  Look what happened to the Bucks when Edens/Lasry decided to pay the luxury tax.

 

Mark A. says there's always money for moves to improve the team, but outside of 2018, it always seems like we are just nibbling around the edges.  I can sympathize with Lauer's frustration because the current players may not be around for those "bites of the apple." They want to win now.  And frankly, so do I.

 

Mark A. has earned the benefit of the doubt that he will never truly strip the team bare like the Orioles or Pirates, but I remain skeptical he'll do what needs to be done to truly contend for a championship.  I think he's very comfortable making the wild card game and saying aw shucks when we get beat by the Braves or Dodgers.

 

Right now we have a lower payroll than what we had in 2012 (in today's dollars), even though revenues have gone up tremendously over the last 10 years.  We were a top 10 payroll in 2012.  No reason why we can't be a top 10 payroll if we wanted to truly contend. 

 

Actually their $132M payroll this year is higher in comparative dollars than their 2012 payroll of $97+M  (CPI calculator).  And no,  Milwaukee could not afford to be a top ten payroll (around $180M) now days.  

[jjgott]

17 minutes ago, wntrtxn21 said:And no,  Milwaukee could not afford to be a top ten payroll (around $180M) now days.  

My bad on the 2022 payroll. I saw a site with a different figure, probably from opening day.
 

But what economic conditions existed in 2012 to afford a top 10 payroll that don’t exist in 2022?

We’ve just gone to the playoffs four years in a row, hopefully 5. I’m sure we got some extra $ from that via ticket sales and postseason revenue sharing. Prior to 2022, the country experienced the longest bull market in history. Media rights deals keep going up and up. We’ve run below league average payrolls the whole time.
 

Where did the money go?

 

Again, I don’t blame the current team being annoyed by the trade deadline. This is 4 years now where Mark A. and Stearns tried to be cute and hope everything clicked vs. going out and trying to win a championship.

 

[Fear The Chorizo]

10 hours ago, jjgott said:

My bad on the 2022 payroll. I saw a site with a different figure, probably from opening day.
 

But what economic conditions existed in 2012 to afford a top 10 payroll that don’t exist in 2022?

We’ve just gone to the playoffs four years in a row, hopefully 5. I’m sure we got some extra $ from that via ticket sales and postseason revenue sharing. Prior to 2022, the country experienced the longest bull market in history. Media rights deals keep going up and up. We’ve run below league average payrolls the whole time.
 

Where did the money go?

 

Again, I don’t blame the current team being annoyed by the trade deadline. This is 4 years now where Mark A. and Stearns tried to be cute and hope everything clicked vs. going out and trying to win a championship.

 

For one, the Brewers averaged about 35K fans per home game in 2012.  That figure is down to about 30K fans per game this year.  And we are two seasons removed from from a 60 game COVID season with zero gameday revenues.  Declining attendance and limited gameday revenue really hurts a market like Milwaukee, especially considering the fact they really haven't capitalized in TV revenue anywhere close to what many big market teams have done, and even some mid-market teams. 

The other aspect is 2012 was the one season the Brewers crept up in payroll from the bottom half of the league over a 5-6 year period surrounding it, and that was even after letting Fielder walk in free agency after the 2011 season - 2013 saw their payroll shrink back down closer to $80M.  The Brewers are a bottom 5 market team in MLB that can maximize gameday revenue in effort to field a team with a payroll in that 15-20 range - stretching higher can only be done a year here or there and it would come with payroll slashing moves in future seasons.

[NBBrewFan]

1 hour ago, Fear The Chorizo said:

For one, the Brewers averaged about 35K fans per home game in 2012.  That figure is down to about 30K fans per game this year.  And we are two seasons removed from from a 60 game COVID season with zero gameday revenues.  Declining attendance and limited gameday revenue really hurts a market like Milwaukee, especially considering the fact they really haven't capitalized in TV revenue anywhere close to what many big market teams have done, and even some mid-market teams. 

The other aspect is 2012 was the one season the Brewers crept up in payroll from the bottom half of the league over a 5-6 year period surrounding it, and that was even after letting Fielder walk in free agency after the 2011 season - 2013 saw their payroll shrink back down closer to $80M.  The Brewers are a bottom 5 market team in MLB that can maximize gameday revenue in effort to field a team with a payroll in that 15-20 range - stretching higher can only be done a year here or there and it would come with payroll slashing moves in future seasons.

The drop in attendance is likely a $20M drop in revenue.  While it's fair to bring up the Covid associated losses, you need to counterbalance that with a nice profit in every other year. There is also significant revenue sharing in 2022 that wasn't there in 2012.  It's just way more complicated than can be fleshed out in a single post. 

I'm not advocating that they spend like drunken sailors, but there is room outside of going 'over-budget to sign Andrew McCutcheon' as MA said when that was the only move this past offseason.  

[monty57]

40 minutes ago, NBBrewFan said:

The drop in attendance is likely a $20M drop in revenue.  While it's fair to bring up the Covid associated losses, you need to counterbalance that with a nice profit in every other year. There is also significant revenue sharing in 2022 that wasn't there in 2012.  It's just way more complicated than can be fleshed out in a single post. 

I'm not advocating that they spend like drunken sailors, but there is room outside of going 'over-budget to sign Andrew McCutcheon' as MA said when that was the only move this past offseason.  

They set their budget every year, and I would assume they leave some room for anticipated profit margins. That just means that they don't know what will happen in any given year, but if things go as expected, they plan to make some money instead of losing money.

When they go over budget, they are incurring expenses that they will have to pay, but they still don't know how the year will play out, so they could lose money if they don't meet projected revenues. That's a calculated risk, so they are only going to go over budget if they think the move will help them meet or exceed projected revenues. I guess they could also willingly lose money in a year if they think they could win it all, but that would be a big gamble, especially for a small-market team.

Going into this year, they did not want to rely on Hiura (who could blame them after the last couple of seasons) so they went over budget to sign McCutchen as their DH. They were looking to make the playoffs and thought his signing would help them get there. They didn't want to sign someone to a multi-year deal, and didn't have a lot of money, so McCutcheon was what they could get for 1-year / $8.5M.

With the downturn in attendance, they are probably looking at losing money this year. That will be even worse if they don't make the playoffs, as the team gets a bump in revenues for that, and the thought that they'd probably make the playoffs probably played into their willingness to sign McCutcheon.

They started this year with a payroll around $132M, and I would guess that will go down to start next year, as their projections will be adjusted to fit the new, lower attendance numbers. Attendance is down 13.4% for the Brewers this year, and 13.4% of $132M is $17,688,000 or right about what Hader could get in arby next year.

Don't expect any big signings this offseason, don't expect Wong's option to get exercised, and expect some of the prospects to be up, as their league minimum salaries will help the Brewers stay under budget. I also wouldn't be surprised to see some of the arby guys traded, but that may be as much of a "baseball move" as it is a "free up salary move."

[Axman59]

14 hours ago, jjgott said:

We’ve just gone to the playoffs four years in a row, hopefully 5. I’m sure we got some extra $ from that via ticket sales and postseason revenue sharing. Prior to 2022, the country experienced the longest bull market in history. Media rights deals keep going up and up. We’ve run below league average payrolls the whole time.

Where did the money go?

Mark A. at home:

[Fear The Chorizo]

2 hours ago, NBBrewFan said:

The drop in attendance is likely a $20M drop in revenue.  While it's fair to bring up the Covid associated losses, you need to counterbalance that with a nice profit in every other year. There is also significant revenue sharing in 2022 that wasn't there in 2012.  It's just way more complicated than can be fleshed out in a single post. 

I'm not advocating that they spend like drunken sailors, but there is room outside of going 'over-budget to sign Andrew McCutcheon' as MA said when that was the only move this past offseason.  

I think you are severely underestimating how much a drop in revenue 5K fewer fans in the stands 82 times a year actually is for a team that doesn't have a mega TV deal.  Just conservatively putting a $100 per fan in terms of revenue spent (ticket + parking + concessions + merchandise) sets that to $41M.

If the Brewers are basing an annual team payroll they expect to contend and draw fans similar to their normal attendance averages when they are playing well (35-38K fans per game), and they wind up seeing almost 20% fewer fans in attendance, it's a big blow to their bottom line.

 

 

[jjgott]

2 hours ago, monty57 said:

They were looking to make the playoffs

That’s precisely my point. There’s a difference between looking to make the playoffs and looking to win a championship. Are we taking multiple bites at the apple or nibbles?

Realistically this specific team had flaws and probably wasn’t the team to go all in on unlike 2018 or 2019. And Like NBBrewfan said, it would be dumb to just spend for spending sake.

 But when you are sitting in first place and management says “good job and we wish you luck, but we really like our chances in 2027”, I can understand why Lauer and others on the team were frustrated.

.

[NBBrewFan]

4 hours ago, Fear The Chorizo said:

I think you are severely underestimating how much a drop in revenue 5K fewer fans in the stands 82 times a year actually is for a team that doesn't have a mega TV deal.  Just conservatively putting a $100 per fan in terms of revenue spent (ticket + parking + concessions + merchandise) sets that to $41M.

If the Brewers are basing an annual team payroll they expect to contend and draw fans similar to their normal attendance averages when they are playing well (35-38K fans per game), and they wind up seeing almost 20% fewer fans in attendance, it's a big blow to their bottom line.

The Brewers don't take home all the money from attendance.  Roughly half of local revenue (48%) goes to the league office.  The Brewers then receive 1/30th of the combined local revenue and 1/30th of the national revenue (National TV, MLB.com).  I used the figure I did to account for the fact the Brewers lose 52% of the the revenue from 5K fewer fans per game (not the entire amount).  The 48% that ISN'T going to the league office due to less fans is a loss divided across the 30 teams so there is less than 1.6% of lost revenue (3.3% of 48%). So in essence we might be talking about the same estimate of $100/fan, but I am accounting for MLB accounting. 

For perspective, the Brewers received (according to baseball-reference.com) in 2018, $118M from local revenue sharing and $91M from national revenue sharing or roughly $209M.  If you assume they make $95/fan in attendance ($100/fan in 2022 dollars) then from 52% of the local revenue and an attendance of 2.85M then the kept local revenue would be 2.85M x $95 x .52 = $140.8M or a total of $350M in revenue for 2018 (without touching playoff revenue) and with a payroll under $100M that means there's $250M to offset non-payroll expenses.  Where did that money go?  I think some of it is not real due to the $100 estimate is just way too high, so my estimate of $20M is likely conservative (it started at $100/fan with 50/50 sharing with the league).  Where they have some "hidden" revenue drops is having to discount tickets just to get more people in the seats and that's likely a few million $ more, but not huge (they get most of their money from the local/national sharing).

 

3 hours ago, jjgott said:

There’s a difference between looking to make the playoffs and looking to win a championship. Are we taking multiple bites at the apple or nibbles?

It's more like licking the apple.

[yourout]

15 minutes ago, NBBrewFan said:

The Brewers don't take home all the money from attendance.  Roughly half of local revenue (48%) goes to the league office.  The Brewers then receive 1/30th of the combined local revenue and 1/30th of the national revenue (National TV, MLB.com).  I used the figure I did to account for the fact the Brewers lose 52% of the the revenue from 5K fewer fans per game (not the entire amount).  The 48% that ISN'T going to the league office due to less fans is a loss divided across the 30 teams so there is less than 1.6% of lost revenue (3.3% of 48%). So in essence we might be talking about the same estimate of $100/fan, but I am accounting for MLB accounting. 

For perspective, the Brewers received (according to baseball-reference.com) in 2018, $118M from local revenue sharing and $91M from national revenue sharing or roughly $209M.  If you assume they make $95/fan in attendance ($100/fan in 2022 dollars) then from 52% of the local revenue and an attendance of 2.85M then the kept local revenue would be 2.85M x $95 x .52 = $140.8M or a total of $350M in revenue for 2018 (without touching playoff revenue) and with a payroll under $100M that means there's $250M to offset non-payroll expenses.  Where did that money go?  I think some of it is not real due to the $100 estimate is just way too high, so my estimate of $20M is likely conservative (it started at $100/fan with 50/50 sharing with the league).  Where they have some "hidden" revenue drops is having to discount tickets just to get more people in the seats and that's likely a few million $ more, but not huge (they get most of their money from the local/national sharing).

 

It's more like licking the apple.

That makes me chuckle.....I keep envisioning the Owl in the tootsie pop commercial.

"Oh Mister Owl how many licks does it take the win a world series.?"

 

[yourout]

3 hours ago, jjgott said:

That’s precisely my point. There’s a difference between looking to make the playoffs and looking to win a championship. Are we taking multiple bites at the apple or nibbles?

Realistically this specific team had flaws and probably wasn’t the team to go all in on unlike 2018 or 2019. And Like NBBrewfan said, it would be dumb to just spend for spending sake.

 But when you are sitting in first place and management says “good job and we wish you luck, but we really like our chances in 2027”, I can understand why Lauer and others on the team were frustrated.

.

I guess the question is are they closer to a "Reload" or a "Rebuild"?

[rickh150]

5 hours ago, Fear The Chorizo said:

I think you are severely underestimating how much a drop in revenue 5K fewer fans in the stands 82 times a year actually is for a team that doesn't have a mega TV deal.  Just conservatively putting a $100 per fan in terms of revenue spent (ticket + parking + concessions + merchandise) sets that to $41M.

If the Brewers are basing an annual team payroll they expect to contend and draw fans similar to their normal attendance averages when they are playing well (35-38K fans per game), and they wind up seeing almost 20% fewer fans in attendance, it's a big blow to their bottom line.

 

 

Ding, ding, ding… on the mark here. Brewers are way down in attendance, and per usual, the attendance figures seem bloated by 5,000 people or so. I have been at a few games this year, usually 30,000 or so. Yet, I’d say that the attendance was closer to 25,000, just a bit over half full. It’s not because of all no shows either, like some believe.

Consider this, in 2008, the Brewers had 44 sellouts! 44. This included 22 consecutive sellouts after CC was traded for. And 3 out of 4 years from 2008-2011 of 3 million fans. Brewers also had 3 million in 2018, I believe, if you count the six playoff games.  
 

Our attendance is still good comparatively with other teams with the bloated numbers, but it has been oh so much better. My guess is the impact would be 40-50 million easy compared to a big year. A couple of big moves at the deadline obviously would have helped attendance, but the team is trying to weigh the benefits of the bottom line and future teams in 2023 and 2024, understandably.