I’m no math major, my SAT scores and Algebra teacher can attest to that.
But when I read that the Mets are close to finding five suckers (sorry, I meant Investors) in the Mets to help them cover some loans. I’m left scratching my head asking myself: How long can they keep this charade going?
A month or two ago the Wilpons made a “bridge loan” from the Bank of America for 40 million dollars. I quickly did the math in my head and concluded that the Mets were now in the hole a whopping 65 million. You see I also added the loan from Major League Baseball-I figured I was right on.
Boy was I off.
It was later published in the New York Times that the Mets not only are in about 350 million dollars in “Club Debt” but also borrowed about 450 million against SNY.
Using a calculator I figured that the Mets debt is rougly 785 million. Not counting the Madoff settlement( which the victims are seeking a nice 380 million) and the loss of revenue from last year-about 70 million.
For the record, I cross referenced 2 different websites( Metsblog, Daily News) for those figures so they may be off a bit- but honestly, does a couple a million really matter at this point? If the Wilpons lose the Madoff case, they can literally be in the hole about 100 million dollars.
Are you kidding?
My point is this, Fred Wilpon can convince five investors to help him out but just how long do the Mets have operating in the red? Here’s another question: Will they ever, ever, operate in the black?
Is it possible for the Wilpons to ever climb out of this hole?
Honestly, and like I said, I’m no math major, I can’t see it happening.
But let’s be optimistic, let’s say the 2012 pull off the next miracle and make the playoffs. Do you think that would do it? Do you think the Met team themselves can systematically pull the Wilpons out of debt with an amazing run to the Fall Classic?
A miracle paying off a tragedy?
What do you think?
4 comments
NJstuckinTX
1/12/2012-9:34am at 9:34 am (UTC -4)
OK, I’ll start this off by saying I have someone else do my taxes, because I don’t understand all the $$$ nonsense. My understanding is that the Mets were in the red because it factored in repayment of loans and such combined with operating expenses + payroll. If they, through reduced payroll and attracting other investors and the like, can get themselves to break even or even into the black slightly, they could ride that out for several years until they repay loans/refinance and gain flexibility to start adding payroll again. It’s certainly not a quick fix/quick turn around thing.
MetsFan4Decades
1/12/2012-9:34am at 9:34 am (UTC -4)
Not sure this is true for all owners – especially those teams owned by a corporation – but in the Wilpon’s case it’s been said they don’t own the team for the purpose of making money. So I’m assuming the goal is to at least break even. Anything after that is gravy.
I’m far from an expert in this type of big business but I’m assuming all teams operate with some type of debt. The question here with the Mets is will that debt choke them to the point of having to sell? Up to this week, I was positive that would eventually be the outcome. Now….I’m not so sure. And if they do hold on, I can see a really low operating budget for like the next 5 years.
Will a magical run in the fall classic be enough to pull them out of the abyss? I really have no idea but I’m willing to bet it would go along way towards moving them towards that. Not that I care one way or the other anymore about saving this team for the Wilpons but I sure would like to see that fantasy of watching them in post season this year……
Paul
1/12/2012-9:40pm at 9:40 pm (UTC -4)
The Mets (and SNY) borrowed money, just like regular people do when they take out a mortgage to buy a house. As long as they can make their payments, it’s not a problem – even though they’re technically “in debt” for decades.
Mr North Jersey
1/12/2012-9:54pm at 9:54 pm (UTC -4)
I don’t recall anyone ever describing it that way. Let me give you props on the analogy.