Brian McKenna
04-19-2006, 08:53 AM
from andrew zimbalist in in the best intersts of the game? p. 167
problem:
in 2003 the phillies received $9M in revenue sharing even though they were in the 4th largest market and #1 unshared market because they mismanaged the team - in 2003 boston (the 6th largest market) paid the 2nd most in revenue sharing
"the proper way to design revenue sharing is through a tax on FORCASTED, not ACTUAL, revenue. forecasted revenue is a function of the market's characteristics: media market population, the number of large corporation, per capita income, the size of the baseball television territory, and so on. based on these characteristics, teams should have a fixed amount they contribute to or recieve from the system each year. if a team performs well on the field, promotes itself well in the local market, and engages in effective community relations projects and thereby raises its revenue, it should still pay (or receive) the fixed amount-no penalty for success. if the team performs poorly on the field, does not promote itself well in the local market, and does not engage in effective community relations projects and thereby lowers its revenue, it, too, should pay (or receive) a fixed amount-no reward for failure."
problem:
in 2003 the phillies received $9M in revenue sharing even though they were in the 4th largest market and #1 unshared market because they mismanaged the team - in 2003 boston (the 6th largest market) paid the 2nd most in revenue sharing
"the proper way to design revenue sharing is through a tax on FORCASTED, not ACTUAL, revenue. forecasted revenue is a function of the market's characteristics: media market population, the number of large corporation, per capita income, the size of the baseball television territory, and so on. based on these characteristics, teams should have a fixed amount they contribute to or recieve from the system each year. if a team performs well on the field, promotes itself well in the local market, and engages in effective community relations projects and thereby raises its revenue, it should still pay (or receive) the fixed amount-no penalty for success. if the team performs poorly on the field, does not promote itself well in the local market, and does not engage in effective community relations projects and thereby lowers its revenue, it, too, should pay (or receive) a fixed amount-no reward for failure."