It isn't that your team's owner can't spend on your team–it's that they won't. (Or in the Yankees' case, just spending isn't enough, I guess)

25 comments
  1. My teams owner spent $60 million on property space to not have new neighbors. So yeah, you’re right.

  2. These debates are pointless as long as people keep acting like owning a baseball team is a hobby rather than a business. It doesn’t matter how much personal wealth someone has, they’re not going to keep pouring money into an investment that isn’t providing a reasonable return.

  3. Just because someone has assets or is “worth” something doesn’t mean they have all that cash to spend. There are a lot of “land rich, cash poor” people out there as an example. People who are technically millionaires because of the land they own but literally can’t afford to eat out at a restaurant because they have no disposable income. Saying every owner *can* have a $300M/year payroll is just completely false.

  4. This makes no sense. The first one, mariners owner John Stanton is worth 1.1 billion, but the mariners are worth 2 billion. How is he not worth like 3 billion then?

  5. So what? The point isn’t for an owner to put his money into the team every year. The point is that the Dodgers take in $600 to $700 million a year. They could have a $400 million dollar payroll and still make more money than roughly 1/2 the teams gross.

    There are a bunch of teams that will take in $250 to $300 million. As long as large market teams bring in double what the small market teams take in we will have what we had this year. 3 of the 10 big, to bigger teams in the Championship Series, and because 1 smaller market team out of 20 or so teams got the last spot, it is OK. It isn’t OK.

  6. In the case of the Dodgers, Walters is the majority owner, but the ownership group has a few partners.

  7. Genuine question here and maybe I’m just stupid… but how can one own a major league team and not be a billionaire? Aren’t all the teams worth at least a billion?

  8. Seeing Dewitt’s smug face on here ruined my night. 3rd on the list and openly said they will be cutting payroll

  9. The problem isn’t just their net worth, many owners also own other businesses and need to invest there too.

    In basketball you have the Rockets owner Tilman Fertitta who’s also the owner of a massive restaurant conglomerate on top of his other businesses AND the Rockets.

  10. Pretty sure Blue Jays have technically the richest owner, Roger’s Communications. Even just going by the major shareholder of Roger’s, Ed is worth about $12B

  11. Was scrolling down expecting to see Rogers at number 1. Not even in the top 18? This list is wrong.

  12. The dodgers have also been outbid for more FA star players than any other team the last ten years.

    Seager and Trea Turner being the biggest contracts Machado as well considering he went from dodgers to padres. Scherzer. I’m sure I’m missing some.

  13. Business owners don’t typically use their own money to run the business. They do it off of revenues, which the Dodgers have the most, largely because of their insane TV deal.

  14. Exactly! It’s frustrating when the wealthiest owners aren’t willing to invest properly in their teams, especially when they can easily afford it. The argument about revenue is important, but at the same time, these teams are sitting on huge valuations.

Leave a Reply