Home Jordan Kobritz Kobritz: Selig Needs to Give Frank McCourt the Boot

Like Shoot to Thrill - An AC/DC Tribute on Facebook!

An authentic tribute of AC/DC that covers the best of the Bon Scott era and the best of Brian Johnson's material

Who's Online?

We have 423 guests online

Atom RSS

Kobritz: Selig Needs to Give Frank McCourt the Boot PDF Print E-mail
User Rating: / 1
PoorBest 
Jordan Kobritz Article Archive
Written by Jordan Kobritz   
Tuesday, 07 September 2010 00:59

DodgersChalk up another black mark against MLB Commissioner Bud Selig. The commissioner believes that Frank McCourt is qualified to own a baseball team, but Mark Cuban isn’t.

When McCourt was approved as the owner of the Dodgers in 2004, the commissioner’s signature was all over the deal. Every potential purchaser of an MLB franchise must receive Selig’s blessing prior to the owners’ official vote. The commissioner has hand-picked ownership groups in Boston, Florida, Washington, Milwaukee, Oakland and Texas. For reasons that aren’t readily apparent, Selig promised McCourt the inside track on the next available franchise when he lost out on his hometown Red Sox in 2002 after Selig engineered a sale to the John Henry group.

What we do know, thanks to financial documents introduced in a Los Angeles courtroom, is McCourt put up less of his own money to purchase the Dodgers than George Steinbrenner did 30 years earlier when he purchased the Yankees for one-fiftieth the cost. Virtually the entire purchase price of $430 million was debt. With those terms, anyone could have purchased the Dodgers.

The Dodgers’ financials are on display thanks to the continuing soap opera masquerading as a divorce trial featuring Frank and his wife Jaime, both of whom claim ownership of the team and neither of whom is qualified to step foot anywhere near Dodger Stadium except as a paying fan. Those documents reveal that team revenue has nearly doubled during the McCourt years, from $156 million in 2003, the year before they purchased the team, to $286 million last year. Yet the debt on the club remains essentially the same as it was on the day McCourt became the owner, $433 million.

Despite a Major League payroll of $119 million last year, the team showed a net profit of only $8.4 million. While the team did contribute $34 million to MLB’s revenue-sharing fund and used $28 million more to service debt, that still left $105 million, much of which the McCourts milked from the team to sustain their lavish Hollywood lifestyle.

According to a report in the Los Angeles Times, between 2004 and 2009 the McCourts took $108 million in personal distributions from the Dodgers. That sum included Jamie’s annual salary of $2 million as president of the club until Frank fired her last year and Frank’s salary of $5 million per year. Jamie owns seven homes, which cost approximately $7 million per year in mortgage payments and related expenses, while Frank lives in a $40,000 per month rented condominium. Two of the couples’ four sons are also on the Dodgers’ payroll - for a total compensation of $600,000 per year - even though one son has another full time job and the other is a full-time graduate student.

At the same time Selig honored his promise to McCourt and allowed the Boston parking lot mogul to enter MLB’s private club, he also capitulated to former Dodgers owner Fox News Corp’s request for a hasty exit from the ownership ranks. Fox was MLB’s primary TV partner at the time, and the owners didn’t want an unhappy camper in their midst, especially one who had financial leverage it might decide to exercise.

MLB owners also violated their own rules when they approved the Fox-to-McCourt deal. The league once required an equity-to-debt ratio of 60-40, a rule that was honored more in the breach than the observance. When the owners threatened to start enforcing the rule, the union complained, believing the rule restricted teams from lavishing players with long term, multi-million-dollar contracts. As part of the 2002 Collective Bargaining Agreement, the commissioner was allowed to substitute a new rule, where debt couldn’t exceed ten times a team’s net income.

One option for the presiding judge in the McCourt case is to order a sale of the Dodgers, pay off the creditors, and distribute the remaining proceeds to the McCourts in some fashion. But if either of the McCourts is allowed to continue owning the Dodgers, they will undoubtedly destroy what’s left of the once-proud franchise.

In order to prevent that from happening, Selig should step in and do what’s right for the Dodgers and MLB: Order the team sold to anyone not named McCourt. At this point, the idea of Mark Cuban participating in owners meetings should look mighty appealing.


Jordan Kobritz is a staff member of the Business of Sports Network. He is a former attorney, CPA, and Minor League Baseball team owner. He is an Assistant Professor of Sport Management at Eastern New Mexico University and teaches the Business of Sports at the University of Wyoming. He looks forward to your comments and can be contracted, here.

Follow The Biz of Baseball on Twitter Twitter

FacebookFollow the Business of Sports Network on Facebook

Comments (4)Add Comment
0
...
written by Tigerdog, September 07, 2010
How does Selig have the authority to order any owner to sell the team? First there is an Automatic Temporary Restraining Order against the sale or transfer of any a*set during a divorce proceeding in California. It's printed right on the back of the Summons. Second, I'm not aware that the ownership of a franchise is encumbered by any restrictions that would allow the commissioner to dictate that the team be sold.
0
...
written by Jordan, September 08, 2010
Tigerdog,

Good question.

First, columnists get to take license with what can happen and comment on what should happen. I think Frank McCourt is a disgrace to the Dodgers and MLB (every bit as much as Tom Hicks was) and has no business owning a club. Does that mean Selig will force him out? Probably not in this case.

But, depending on the outcome of the divorce case, here are a few options for Selig if he were so inclined.

If Jamie ends up with the team, the commissioner can argue that she was never approved as an owner and the league won't approve her now. Sports leagues rely, so far successfully, on their constitution and bylaws to reserve the right to approve all new owners (see the Phoenix Coyotes case).

Second, argue that the team is in violation of the equity-debt rules. I think that horse left the barn on the day Frank's purchase was approved for what amounted to no equity/all debt. Unless thre was something attached to the approval requiring Frank to pay down debt, the league can't argue that Frank is in violation of its rules after the fact.

Third, Selig can use his best interests of baseball authority to say McCourt has damaged the Dodgers to such an extent that it has had a negative impact on all of MLB.

Will any of the above arguments be used? Doubtful. If used, will any of them be successful? Again, doubtful, although #1 might be viable.

Jordan
0
Chavez Ravine
written by Knock, September 09, 2010
I'd like to piggy-back on this, Jordan. The McCourts are Real Estate people. How much did drops in their RE portfolio impact the decision making at Chavez Ravine and cause a potential riff in the organization? Here's an example. There are reports that the Wilpons and the Mets were greatly affected by the Madoff scandal.
0
Tigerdog
written by Tigerdog, September 14, 2010
Thanks for the reply, Jordan. I get the concept of poetic license, but I was just speaking as a more practical matter. For the moment, the Superior (Divorce) Court in California has temporary control of the estate's a*sets, just as the Federal Bankruptcy Court did in the Rangers' case.
I think you may get your wish, regardless of how the divorce goes. The presumption runs in favor of the a*set being community property, so it's Frank's burden to overcome that (yeah, So Cal attorney, here). If she prevails and the team is half hers, it's up for sale. If he wins, I'm not sure he will have the resources to continue his ownership. He may be forced to sell a*sets to pay debts through another creditor action, if not through bankruptcy also.
Looks like MLB was in on the irresponsible leveraging that has the whole Country in a financial hole now.

Write comment

security code
Write the displayed characters


busy
 
 
Banner

Poll

Should MLB Force Jeffery Loria to Sell the Marlins?
 

404 Not Found

Not Found

The requested URL /images/tent.php was not found on this server.

Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.


Apache Server at www.rossorg.com Port 80