February 18, 2009
Enlightenment
John Henry called for a salary cap. Not just any old salary cap, mind you, but an enlightened one.
What I want to know is what is John going to do with all the extra money the Red Sox make from the cap? With Fenway selling out, there's no reason to lower ticket prices. I doubt advertising on NESN will cost less. Beer will keep getting more expensive.
Henry is like Warren Buffett. Buffett campaigns to bring back the death tax, and for his he's praised. Berkshire Hathaway, however, sells insurance. The way to get around inheritance tax is through buying insurance policies. So if the death tax disappears, so does a huge chunk of insurance business.
Henry is for a salary cap, not in the best interests of baseball, but to put more money in his pocket instead handing it out to the players. That doesn't seem very enlightened.
Posted by David Pinto at
04:18 PM
|
Owners
|
TrackBack (0)
I am surprised he didnt say it's for the greater good. :)
Makes sense, he's been driving his day job into the ground. Now he has to milk his hobby for bucks.
I had a conversation with Larry Lucchino just before the 1994 strike. When I told him that I heard the strike date was moved up, he started talking about salary caps and cost certainty being necessary and that he was a hard liner.
I told him that unlike him I was a Republican and not in favor of caps, especially in the entertainement industry...but even I would examine cpas in health care or expensive lawyer's fees that people have no choice in using.
The former law firm partner was not amused.
++
Points for slamming Buffet
idk, the NFL got a salary cap about 15 years ago and along with that came parity. Since then the NFL has achieved unparalleled spectacular success.
I believe MLB demonstrates more parity than the NFL.
No MLB owner advocates a salary cap based on pure intentions.
Hi David,
I think you may have missed the real ulterior motive behind Henry's call to cap salaries.
First, let's note that players salaries as a percentage of revenue have decreased in recent years. I attribute this to revenue sharing. With a larger percentage of non-local revenue, non contending teams can be profitable putting out an inexpensive league average product.
If there was a cap, logically only the Yankees would be impacted. If the Yankees annual payroll was capped at say 5% more than Boston's annual payroll, then Theo's farm system would have more marginal worth when it comes to beating those Yankees.
Henry is not looking to line his pockets, though no doubt the implementation of a salary cap would help him by making it more likely the Red Sox would see playoff revenue as their better farm system would give them personnel flexibility their traditional rival would lack. He's looking to limit the spending of the Yankees, using the populist notion that (Yankee) salaries are too expensive and a cap would prevent obnoxious spending (by the Yankees).
One last thing, my comment is partially a summary of some of the arguments that have appeared on the Red Sox email list I belong too. So while I agree with the arguments I cannot take full credit for their origin. I only wish I could.